The new Article 95 par 9 outlines the composition of the disciplinary commission (namely, the President, the Jogorku Kenesh and the Council of Judges shall each appoint one-third of the members), while specifying that the disciplinary commission is part of the Council of Judges. Yet, the current draft amendment to Article 102 par 2 removes the consideration of disciplinary issues from the competence of the Council of Judges, which presumably aims to ensure that the disciplinary commission has a semi-autonomous status, and is not unduly influenced by the Council of Judges. At the same time, the proposed amendments foresee a greater role of the President and of the Jogorku Kenesh in disciplinary matters of the judiciary. As a consequence, this would lead to a situation where jointly, the presidential and Jogorku Kenesh appointees would always be in majority for assessing disciplinary matters concerning judges, which raises concerns as to the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers.