-
31.03.17
The Public Integrity Council and NGOs have urged the High Qualification Commission of Judges to make public not only the number of points for practical tasks, but also the tasks themselves, the texts of the candidates’ works, the method of their evaluation and points awarded by each member of the Commission. Indeed, under Article 85 of the Law of Ukraine On Judicial System and Status of Judges, the High Qualification Commission is obliged to ensure the transparency of the examination.
This week, the Commission published the results of the candidates’ practical task. However, the content of the written assignments, the candidates’ works with answers, and grades given by each member of the Commission based on appropriate criteria have not been disclosed and remain concealed from the public, giving rise to doubts, which can undermine confidence in the final results of the contest on the part of both candidates and the public closely following the competition.
We believe that to address these doubts and maintain trust in the process of selection of judges to the new Supreme Court, the High Qualification Commission is to fulfill the requirements of the law on transparency and disclose the said information.
The Public Integrity Council is also surprised that after announcing on March 28 the minimum score for practical tasks and issuing the list of candidates with the relevant points, the High Qualification Commission of Judges on the next day admitted 43 candidates who did not reach the minimum score to the next stage of the competition.
The Law of Ukraine On the Judicial System and Status of Judges was interpreted by the High Qualification Commission of Judges in such a way that the exam includes one stage carried out by way of testing judicial candidates and giving them a practical assignment, and, therefore, should be evaluated by overall score. However, following this logic, the Commission would have had to admit all candidates who scored below the minimum acceptable score to the practical assignment. But it did not. The Public Integrity Council believes that this interpretation is not consistent and can undermine the credibility of the judicial selection process.
Considering the above, in order to ensure confidence in the selection of judges to the new Supreme Court, we call upon to the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine:
- to disclose the content of written assignments, the written work of each candidate, the methods of their assessment and points assigned by each member of the Commission who checked the works;
- to explain why the Commission failed to take into account the minimum score for the practical assignment (set by the Commission itself), so that 43 candidates who did not score the minimum number of points were admitted to the next stage of the competition.