Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor

The problem of  judicial independence has been one of the most important problems of the Republic of Armenia since independence, to which amendment programs of both legislation and practice have been directed for decades.  

On October 10, 2019, the Government of the Republic of Armenia adopted the decree on approving the strategy for the years 2019-2023 of judicial and legal reforms and actions plan resulting from it. 

The final purpose of the strategy and actions plan resulting from it was to reconstruct state structures related to the system of courts and justice according to the standards of freedom and accountability, which is necessary for the development of a democratic state.  According to the strategy, the judicial system should be completely independent to become a balancing power in relations with other branches of the government. 

This study, on the one hand, represents the international standards necessary for the independence of the judicial system, on the other hand, the domestic regulations of the RA with a comparative analysis. Taking into account the developments of recent years, special attention is paid to the role of the Supreme Judicial Council as a guarantor of ensuring the independence of the judiciary, the order of formation and the main functions, in particular, the selection and appointment of judges, promotions, disciplinary liability and evaluation of the activities of judges. The latter are the main components for the evaluation of the independence of the judicial system, the thorough study of which is presented in the REPORT. Our recommendations are presented below. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The composition and formation of the Supreme Judicial system 

• Ensure a competitive, transparent and meritorious process of nomination and selection of non-judge member candidates of the Supreme Judicial Council by the National Assembly.
• Review the practice of selecting non-judge members of the Supreme Judicial Council, excluding the selection of representatives of the executive or legislative body, as well as politically connected candidates in the Council.
• Clarify the requirements set by the National Assembly for non-judge member candidate lawyers-scientists in the SJC: the main direction, field and period of the work, as well as the requirements set for a reputable lawyer and the objective criteria for its evaluation.

Selection and appointment of judges 

• Legislate the requirement that decisions made by the Supreme Judicial Council on the selection and promotion of judges be substantiated, particularly in cases of appointments with negative conclusions. 
• Eliminate the appointment and promotion of the candidates of judges having low integrity in the judicial system by the Supreme Judicial Council. 
• Legislatively provide the requirement to make public the final part of the conclusions for the evaluation of integrity made by the Corruption Prevention Committee.  

The disciplinary liability of judges 

• Abolish the practice of initiating proceedings of selective or “punitive” purposes by the competent bodies having the right to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the judges. 
• Review the composition of the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee of Judges, planning a broad involvement of the civil society.
• To present clear requirements of professional activity to the non-judge members, to envisage a mandatory requirement of political neutrality for the latter.
• To establish by law that the General Assembly of Judges must make a justified decision when selecting or rejecting members for the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee of judges.  To avoid deadlock situations, to provide that in the event that a non-judge member is not elected by the General Assembly, the selection is carried out by the Supreme Judicial Council. 
• Ensure that any decision on subjecting judges to disciplinary liability by the Supreme Judicial Council be fully substantiated and reasoned for the type of the disciplinary liability chosen. 
• Ensure the right of judges to appeal against the decisions of the Supreme Judicial Council and implement the necessary effective mechanisms. 

 This study was conducted  thanks to the support of the Democracy Development Foundation within the framework of the “Integrity of Justice Reforms” project.