Lawyers demand public scorecards in the appointment of judges – Newsday Zimbabwe

Legal advisor Justice Mavedzenge said at the Law Society of Zimbabwe Summer School conference last week that the existing process lacks transparency, especially when it comes to the president’s powers to appoint judges.

LEGAL experts have called for the publication of scorecards used in the appointment of judges in Zimbabwe to improve transparency in the process.

The lawyers also called for independence of the process from political influence to avoid undermining any of the profession’s mandates to be independent.

Legal advisor Justice Mavedzenge said at the Law Society of Zimbabwe Summer School conference last week that the existing process lacks transparency, especially when it comes to the president’s powers to appoint judges.

In terms of Article 180 of the Constitution, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) must announce the position and invite the President and members of the public to submit nominations.

It would also entail conducting public interviews with potential candidates and drawing up a list of three qualified individuals as nominees for each position before submitting the list to the president, who would be required to appoint one of the nominees.

“The process of selecting and appointing new judges is not transparent at certain critical stages. Sometimes the public is not informed by the JSC about the candidates shortlisted for appointment after the interviews.

“There appears to be a lack of transparency and objectivity in the exercise of powers by the President when he decides to appoint.

“There are no publicly known criteria that the President should use to make the final selection from the list of JSC shortlisted candidates.”

He said the lack of publicly known selection criteria makes it difficult for the public to judge and understand why the president chose some and left out others.

Mavhedzenge recommended that criteria be developed by the relevant authorities so that the president can be held accountable for his or her future decisions.

“Although it can be argued that all candidates on the JSC shortlist are apointable, the President is still expected to demonstrate to the public that he or she has applied his or her views impartially in making the final selection .

“This cannot be tested without the public knowing the criteria the President must apply in selecting one of the three candidates recommended for each vacancy.

“I therefore recommend that criteria be developed and published by which the President can be held accountable when he or she makes the final selection.”

He also urged the JSC to publish the names of candidates recommended for appointment.

“This should be accompanied by a score sheet showing how each of the candidates performed during the selection process.

“This would significantly increase transparency and public confidence in the fairness of the selection process.

“Despite improvements in the constitutional framework to enhance transparency and objectivity in the selection and appointment of judges, the Zimbabwean judiciary has been rocked by several cases of corruption and unethical conduct, leading to some judges being removed from office while others have resigned. .”

Another legal expert, Sheila Kanyangarara, called for more transparency in the legal system.

“As lawyers, we know that the public nominates and the president also nominates. We need to know who nominated who, it needs to be known. This also includes the shortlisting part.

“We also need to know the final report prepared by the tribunal on how judges are dismissed because if we don’t know, how can we prepare the new judges so that they do not make the same mistake, so that they have good character? , responsible and ethical,” she said.

JSC Secretary Walter Chikwanha, however, called on the law society to have a clear knowledge of information worth publishing and confidential information.

“When we talk about transparency, let’s not rely on the everyday meaning of the work and understand that there is such a thing as confidentiality.

“As a committee, we cannot say that we have not made any mistakes since we started implementing the provisions of the Constitution.

“We take every opportunity to continue to improve and make the judicial appointment process as perfect as possible,” he said.

Related topics