Epress.am News from Armenia
The president’s decisive role of appointing and suspending judges is harming trust toward the independence of the judicial system, stated the Commissioner of Human Rights of the Council of Europe Nils Muiznieks’ summary report on his short visit to Armenia in early October of 2014. In the report, Muiznieks talks, among others, about issues related to the judicial system, specifically the president’s decision-making role in appointing and terminating judges.
The report criticizes Armenia’s president’s involvement with the confirmation of the list of judicial candidates proposed by the Council of Justice, as well as the final confirmation of appointing or terminating the powers of a judge.
“For example, various interlocutors of the Commissioner argued that the procedures of selection, appointment, promotion and dismissal of judges are not conducive to judicial independence, in particular due to the prominent role of the President of the Republic in those processes. As noted above, the COJ compiles and submits to the President for his approval the list of judicial candidates for all courts – the President is involved both in approving the list of candidates and in the final appointment of the COJ’s nominees – and the official promotion list for judges. The COJ also submits any motion for terminating the powers of a judge to the President. Whereas the President may reject any recommendation of the COJ, he does not have the obligation by law to explain the reasons behind his decision, and there is no procedure to challenge the President’s decisions. Council of Europe experts who analyzed this system concluded that the decisive role of the President in the process of selection and career development (promotions) of judges is not in line with European standards. The experts considered that the President’s role in the procedure should instead be limited to a formal one, whereas the actual decision-making power should belong to judicial self-governing bodies,” stated the report.
Summing up this part of the report, Nils Muiznieks recommended to review the order to resolve administration of courts and increase trust of citizens towards the independence of the judiciary, “for instance by introducing an obligation to motivate any rejection of the COJ’s recommendation or by limiting the basis for such a rejection to certain grounds, would reduce the above-mentioned risks and the danger of politicization of the appointment and promotion process.”
Speaking to Epress.am, Lawyer Vahe Grigoryan stated that although the Council of Europe’s Human Rights Commissioner’s report has no binding force, it is in an important position for cultivating an approach.
“If these suggestions and recommendation are not continually implemented, then it will result in a possible increase of human rights violations and verdicts by the ECtHR recognizing those violations, and those verdicts do have a binding force. The Council of Europe’s Human Rights Commissioner’s observations and factual descriptions in the human rights sector are almost always taken into basis by the ECtHR while hearing various cases, as well as by the PACE and the EU Monitoring Committee,” said Vahe Grigoryan.