Home > 5.3 Validity of the question > KYRGYZ REPUBLIC- Joint Opinion on the Draft Law "On Introduction of Amendments and Changes to the Constitution"
 
 
 
Download file    
 
 
Paragraph 52
 

In principle, all decisions concerning the appointment and the professional career of judges, which should include the appointment to the highest posts within the judiciary, should be based on merit, following pre-determined objective criteria set out in law, and open and transparent procedures. The involvement and decisive influence in appointment procedures and promotion of ordinary judges, including constitutional judges in the Kyrgyz Republic, of independent judicial councils or similar independent self-regulation bodies is generally considered to be an appropriate method to guarantee judicial independence. As recommended in OSCE/ODIHR’s Kyiv Recommendations (2010), in cases where the final appointment of a judge lies with the president, his/her discretion to appoint should be limited to those candidates nominated by an independent selection body; any refusal to appoint such a candidate should be based on procedural grounds only and would need to be reasoned. Another possible option is to give the selection body the power to overrule a presidential veto by a qualified majority vote. The proposed system of appointment of judges of the Constitutional Chamber which gives a wide discretion to the President is highly problematic from the viewpoint of the separation of powers and for ensuring effective checks and balances. Similar comments apply with regard to the appointment of Supreme Court judges (see Sub-Section 4.2. infra). It is strongly recommended to amend the procedures for appointing Supreme Court and Constitutional Chamber judges to ensure greater openness and transparency, which may include a greater role for the Council of Judges.