Nov 18, 2019 | News
The ICJ today called on the Hungarian authorities to desist from instigating disciplinary proceedings threatened against Judge Csaba Vasvári, a judge of the Central District Court of Pest and a member of the Hungarian National Judicial Council.
The imminent threat of disciplinary action is a consequence of a preliminary reference Judge Vasvári made to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
“Judge Vasvári faces disciplinary action as a direct result of his request for a preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the EU on the very question of judicial independence in Hungary. This is an extremely concerning attempt to interfere with the independence of a judge in discharging his judicial function which, if it proceeds any further, will set a dangerous precedent.” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia programme.
A motion to begin disciplinary proceedings against Judge Vasvári was brought by the Acting President of the Budapest Regional Court in October, following Judge Vasvári’s request in criminal proceedings before him last July, for a preliminary ruling the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
In the request to the CJEU, Judge Vasvári raised questions regarding compliance with the principle of judicial independence under Article 19.1 of the Treaty of the European Union (TEU), in particular the appointment procedures for court presidents, and remuneration for judges, as well as questions regarding the right to interpretation in court.
Following a decision of the Hungarian Supreme Court in September that the reference was contrary to Hungarian law since it was irrelevant to the case, disciplinary action against judge Vasvári was sought on the grounds that in making the reference, he violated the requirement to conduct himself with dignity and refrain from action which would undermine the dignity of the judiciary.
The motion for disciplinary proceedings is now expected to be considered by a panel of the Service Court, which will decide if disciplinary proceedings will commence.
“The actions of Judge Vasvári in making a preliminary reference to the CJEU were an entirely legitimate exercise of his judicial functions in accordance with EU law. It is essential that judges are able to use all appropriate judicial avenues to address and uphold the rule of law, including to protect the right to a fair trial and the independence of the judiciary” said Róisín Pillay. “It is also necessary for the proper application of EU law, that judges are able refer questions to the CJEU under Article 267 of the Treaty without undue hindrance.”
The ICJ recalls that under international standards on the independence of the judiciary, judges must decide matters before them impartially, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason (Principle 2, UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary). Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec (2010) 12 of the Committee of Ministers specifies that “the interpretation of the law, assessment of facts or weighing of evidence carried out by judges to determine cases should not give rise to civil or disciplinary liability, except in cases of malice and gross negligence.”
The UN Basic Principles on the Independence of Judiciary (principle 8) also affirm that “members of the judiciary are like other citizens entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly; provided, however, that in exercising such rights, judges shall always conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.”
Nov 6, 2019 | News
The ICJ today called on the Algerian authorities to reverse the decision of the Minister of Justice to transfer 2’998 judges, and instead ensure their right to security of tenure and protect the individual and institutional independence of the judiciary in the country.
The ICJ further called on the authorities to refrain from any unlawful or disproportionate use of force against the judges who are currently on strike in a protest against the Minister’s decision.
The call comes after security forces stormed the Oran’s Court of Appeal on 3 November 2019, using force against the judges to end the strike, and amidst the growing, legitimate demands for the establishment of the rule of law and the end the executive’s control over the judiciary.
“The Algerian authorities must end their interference in judicial affairs and ensure that all decisions pertaining to the management of the career of judges, including transfers, are taken by an independent High Judicial Council on the basis of objective criteria and transparent procedures,” said Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.
Under Organic Law n° 04-12 on the High Judicial Council (HJC), the President and Vice-President of the HJC are respectively the Algerian President and the Minister of Justice. For this and other reasons the ICJ considers that the HJC as currently constituted is not independent of the executive, and consequently that the judiciary as a whole is both institutionally and in practice subordinated to the executive in contravention of international standards on judicial independence and impartiality.
“Instead of attacking judges who are seeking to defend the rule of law, the most urgent priority for Algerian authorities should be the reform of the HJC to ensure its full independence,” Benarbia added.
In 2018, the Human Rights Committee expressed, in its Concluding Observations on the fourth periodic report of Algeria, its concerns over the insufficient guarantees for judicial independence and the need to strengthen the independence and the powers of the HJC.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Program, t: +41 22 979 38 17 ; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Algeria-Judges strike-News-2019-ARA (Arabic version, in PDF)
Nov 5, 2019 | News
The ICJ welcomed today’s ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union finding that Poland violated the independence of the judiciary by lowering in 2017 the pension age of Polish judges and giving the power to maintain them in office to the Minister of Justice.
The Court also found that the new law creating widely disparate retirement ages between women and men who are ordinary court judges or prosecutors – 60 and 65 respectively – constituted unlawful discrimination
“The Court of Justice has upheld the cardinal principle of the rule of law that the terms of judges cannot be determined controlled on an ad hoc basis by political powers,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.
“This judgment confirms that these retirement laws were a direct blow to the principle of separation of powers, the bedrock of the rule of law,” he added.
The Court of Justice held as contrary to the principle of independence of the judiciary under article 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU as series of laws lowering the age of retirement for ordinary judges, prosecutors and Supreme Court judges from 70 to 65 years for men and 65 to 60 for women. These laws allowed the Minister of Justice to decide which judges are to be reinstated.
“Poland should scrap these laws entirely and reinstate fully the situation of the judiciary prior to their enactment,” Frigo said.
“These laws were but a part of the systemic attack to the independence of the judiciary that the Polish government should stop,” he added.
The ICJ also called on Poland to bring the retirement ages of men and women back into parity.
The case was brought by the European Commission in an infringement proceeding against Poland for violation of the obligation to provide access to justice for EU law violations under article 19 TFEU.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
More information on Massimo Frigo’s blog
Oct 24, 2019 | News
The ICJ in collaboration with the Judicial Institute of Africa (JIFA) and Democratic Governance and Rights Unit (DGRU) convened a three-day training workshop for Zimbabwe court researchers.
The training workshop was held from the 21 to 23 October 2019 at the University of Cape Town, South Africa.
The judicial research programme is an initiative that was established to increase the research capabilities of the researchers, which would in turn improve the jurisprudence emerging from the courts.
Court researchers play a crucial role in the development of Zimbabwean jurisprudence through the work they undertake on behalf of the judges.
Furthermore, the increased efficiency that they bring to the courts allows judges to expend more of their efforts on well-informed analysis and administration of cases.
This brings a better quality of justice and reduces waiting periods for judgments and case backlog.
Arnold Tsunga the Director of the Africa Regional Programme of the ICJ remarked that “given the importance of the space that these researchers occupy, it is important to ensure that their legal knowledge and skills continue to be relevant and comprehensive so that they can provide a service of quality that adequately responds to the needs of judges. This in turn will also contribute to attainment of the UN Strategic Develop Goal (SDG) 16 and 5 on access to justice for all as well as SDG 5 on leaving no one behind.”
The areas of discussion for the three-day training workshop focused on judicial ethics, accessing judgments, accessing research materials, judgment writing and memo writing.
The training workshop was facilitated by judges, university teaching staff, and external resources. Twenty researchers are took part in the training workshop, including 17 women.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, t: +26377728 3248; e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Rumbidzai Muyendesi, t: +263771666579; e: rumbidzai.muyendesi(a)icj.org
Oct 22, 2019 | News
On 25 and 26 October, the ICJ in Central America will hold the VII Regional Conference on Judicial Independence, with the central theme of the protection and security of Judges.
The Conference will discuss the role that governments should play in the protection of judges, as well as the relationship between judicial independence and security of those who deliver justice.
Participants from outside the region include Radmila Dragicevic Justice of the Supreme Court of Cassation of Serbia and Vice-President of the ICJ; José Antonio Martín Pallín, Judge Emeritus of the Spanish Supreme Court of Justice and ICJ Commissioner, and Erland Flaterud and Finn Arne Schanche, both judges from Norway.
Nine other judges from Central America will attend, including Leonardo Ramírez of the Supreme Court of Justice of El Salvador Murcia and Fernando Cruz Castro, President of the Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica.
The ICJ regrets that the Supreme Court of Justice of Guatemala has not been in a position to receive this important delegation at its plenary on 23 October to address the issue of the security of judges.
The ICJ recalls that this Conference is held within the framework of a letter of cooperation and understanding agreed with the former President of the Judicial Branch and the Supreme Court of Justice, Ranulfo Rojas Cetina in 2015.
The ICJ is particularly concerned that there is presently an unfilled vacancy for Chief of Security for the judiciary, following the resignation of the former Chief who had allegedly engaged in conduct not consistent with his function.
Ramón Cadena, Director of the ICJ for Central America, said: “It is the duty of the Supreme Court of Justice to inform the Guatemalan public about the Judges Protection System, so that it does not become a source of corruption or in any way interferes with the work of independent, and impartial judges.”
In Guatemala, the international delegation will meet with judges such as Yassmín Barrios, Ericka Aifán, Miguel Ángel Gálvez, Carlos Ruano and Pablo Xitumul among others. They have been the subject of seemingly unfounded complaints which have posed risks to their personal security and independent judicial functioning.
