The need for a critical reflection of the parliamentary election of judges
The independence of the judiciary forms the foundation of a functioning democratic constitutional state. Only if judges can decide free from political pressure and partisan interests, is it possible to guarantee fair trials and enforce fundamental rights. The involvement of political actors in the selection process therefore harbors the risk ofJudicial decisions are influenced by power interests and thus undermining confidence in the judiciary. This makes a careful consideration of the procedures and criteria when electing judges is essential.
Is there a party-political instrumentalization of the judiciary?
The party-political instrumentalization of the judiciary means that judicial independence is called into question and decisions are no longer based exclusively on legal considerations. Instead, there is a risk that judgments will be perceived as an expression of political power struggles, which significantly weakens the population’s trust in the rule of law. In addition,such an influence lead to a selective justice in which certain political groups are preferred or disadvantaged. This not only undermines equality before the law, but can also lead to erosion of democratic principles in the long term, since the judiciary as a control body loses credibility towards legislative and executive executives. Therefore it is essentialDevelop mechanisms that ensure impartial and transparent selection of judges.
Select judges by party political affiliation or attitude
The practice of selecting judges according to party political affiliation or attitude often arises from the desire of political actors to influence jurisprudence and thus secure or expand their position of power. However, this approach is in contradiction to the basic idea of judicial independence, since it carries the risk that legal decisions will notare more neutral, but are characterized by party-political considerations. Such a selection policy means that qualified candidates are excluded regardless of their professional suitability or integrity, while loyalty to a party is considered a priority criterion. This not only weakens trust in the judiciary as an impartial institution, but can alsoAs a whole, the rule of law affects the impression that jurisprudence is a mere instrument of party-political interests.
Direct Democracy: Introduction of a direct election by the population
The introduction of a direct election by the population can make a significant contribution to strengthening the democratic legitimacy and independence of the judiciary. Involving citizens in the selection process, transparency is promoted and confidence in the jurisdiction is strengthened, since the appointment of judges is no longer behind closed doors or in power pokerpolitical parties takes place. Such a form of selection forces candidates to position themselves publicly and to demonstrate their professional competence and integrity. At the same time, the risk of political influence is reduced, since the decision is no longer exclusively in the hands of party-political actors.
Judges term of office: appointment of a judge
The introduction of Judges’ term limitations makes a significant contribution to strengthening the independence of the judiciary and ensuring a continuous renewal of the case law. A limited term of office prevents individuals from exerting influence on important legal decisions over decades and thus potentially deadlocked thought patterns orParty political ties arise. At the same time, it promotes the opportunity to introduce qualified candidates from different generations and with different backgrounds of experience in the justice system. In addition, a term of office limitation can help reduce the risk of political instrumentalization by enabling the long-term dependence on certain politicalmajorities or networks is reduced. What is decisive, however, is that the term of office is designed in such a way that it is sufficiently long to ensure judicial independence and continuity, but at the same time enables a new appointment regularly. In addition, clear criteria and transparent procedures for reappointment or succession should be developed to help arbitrarily andexclude political pressure. This not only ensures the quality of the case law, but also strengthens the population’s confidence in a dynamic and just system of justice.
