The Chamber of Advocates has described the government’s proposed changes to the system of judicial appointments as “an encouraging move” which, save for the appointment of the Chief Justice, is set to eliminate “political motivation or undertone.”

In a statement on Thursday, the chamber described the proposals as a “welcome development that augurs well for the commitment towards creating a system of appointments devoid of political connotations.”

Whilst pointing out that the government had taken on board almost all recommendations it had made, the chamber said that in the case of the appointment of the Chief Justice, its preference had not been taken on board.

Under the proposed new system, recommendations by the Judicial Appointments Committee will be passed directly to the President who will then select one on the basis of those recommendations.

In respect of the Chief Justice, the Chamber had proposed that the appointment be entrusted to the members of the judiciary themselves, with the appointee being a senior judge.

This option would have eliminated political intervention as well as the possibility of having persons, who are not members of the judiciary, being appointed directly to the top judicial post, the chamber said.

It did not say what method the government has proposed. 

Whilst describing the proposals as “a significant and positive step in addressing the Venice Commission opinion of December 2018” the chamber observed that there were other issues, possibly not raised by the Venice Commission, which needed to be addressed.

These too were “very relevant” for the system of “checks and balances” as well as the current system of judicial appointments, said the Chamber, looking forward to further collaboration to implement “a robust conceptual framework.”