NewsWhore
08-18-2011, 04:50 PM
Writing in today's El Caribe, lawyer Marisol Vicens criticizes the government for establishing a 10-day term for the presentation of candidacies for judges for the Supreme Court of Justice, Supreme Electoral Court and the Constitutional Court.
She also criticizes the ruling for the selection, which has not be made public, for allowing a high level of discretion to the majority of the National Judicial Council (CNM), establishing that for anything not foreseen in the ruling, the CNM can take the convenient decisions. Vicens writes: "It is unconceivable that the ruling for the Fundamental Law of the National Judicial Council has not established the procedure for the evaluation of the candidates and formulating of objections to candidates, did not make it obligatory for (the proceedings) to be televised to guarantee the transparency of the process, nor the way how 75% of the posts will be assigned to judicial career judges for the Supreme Court and if this percentage includes the present judges of the Supreme Court."
She points out that the members of the CNM did establish a 10-day period for the presentation of the candidacies and decided that the CNM would have the discretion to assess whether the candidates need to sit for public interviews.
"The case of the ruling for the evaluation of the performance of the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice is even worse, because not only does it not establish the procedures to follow for these important evaluations, but paradoxically its scant articles instead of contributing important elements to the procedures outlined by the Fundamental Law of the National Judicial Council (CNM) omit important dispositions of the law such as that the one that establishes that the base of the evaluations are the performance reports that by mandate of the Judicial Career Law need to be made of the presidents of the Supreme Court and its chambers, as well as of all the judges. It would appear that it was negotiated to eliminate the fulfillment of this legal mandate, which is unacceptable."
Vicens concludes that the director of the process is President Leonel Fernandez. "On him depends that this very transcendental process for our institutionalism should end well and be participative, transparent and fulfill the laws, or unfortunately it could end up being a custom made suit to the measure of his interests."
More... (http://www.dr1.com/index.html#7)
She also criticizes the ruling for the selection, which has not be made public, for allowing a high level of discretion to the majority of the National Judicial Council (CNM), establishing that for anything not foreseen in the ruling, the CNM can take the convenient decisions. Vicens writes: "It is unconceivable that the ruling for the Fundamental Law of the National Judicial Council has not established the procedure for the evaluation of the candidates and formulating of objections to candidates, did not make it obligatory for (the proceedings) to be televised to guarantee the transparency of the process, nor the way how 75% of the posts will be assigned to judicial career judges for the Supreme Court and if this percentage includes the present judges of the Supreme Court."
She points out that the members of the CNM did establish a 10-day period for the presentation of the candidacies and decided that the CNM would have the discretion to assess whether the candidates need to sit for public interviews.
"The case of the ruling for the evaluation of the performance of the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice is even worse, because not only does it not establish the procedures to follow for these important evaluations, but paradoxically its scant articles instead of contributing important elements to the procedures outlined by the Fundamental Law of the National Judicial Council (CNM) omit important dispositions of the law such as that the one that establishes that the base of the evaluations are the performance reports that by mandate of the Judicial Career Law need to be made of the presidents of the Supreme Court and its chambers, as well as of all the judges. It would appear that it was negotiated to eliminate the fulfillment of this legal mandate, which is unacceptable."
Vicens concludes that the director of the process is President Leonel Fernandez. "On him depends that this very transcendental process for our institutionalism should end well and be participative, transparent and fulfill the laws, or unfortunately it could end up being a custom made suit to the measure of his interests."
More... (http://www.dr1.com/index.html#7)