LEGAL experts have called for the publishing of scorecards used to consider the appointment of judges in Zimbabwe to improve transparency in the process.
The lawyers also called for the independence of the process from political influence to avoid undermining one of the profession's mandates of being independent.
Speaking at the Law Society of Zimbabwe Summer School conference on Friday last week, law consultant Justice Mavedzenge said the existing process lacks transparency, especially on the President’s powers to appoint judges.
In terms of section 180 of the Constitution, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) must advertise the position, invite the President and members of the public to make nominations.
It would also lead in conducting public interviews of prospective candidates and prepare a list of three qualified persons as nominees for each position before submitting the list to the President, who must appoint one of the nominees.
“The process of selecting and appointing new judges lacks transparency in certain critical stages. At times, the public is not informed by the JSC of the candidates who were shortlisted for appointment after the interviews.
“There seems to be a lack of transparency and objectivity in the exercise of the powers by the President when he decides to appoint.
“There are no publicly known criteria that the President is supposed to use to make the final selection from the list of candidates shortlisted by the JSC.”
- Heated estate wrangle sucks in JSC, Sacu
- Magistrates' court for Mkoba
- Ziyambi defends Judiciary Amendment Bill
- Rights activist guns for top judge
Keep Reading
He said the absence of publicly known selection criteria made it difficult for the public to evaluate and understand why the President has chosen some and left out others.
Mavhedzenge recommended that a criteria be developed by the relevant authorities so that the President can be held accountable for his or her decisions going forward.
“Although one can argue that all the candidates shortlisted by the JSC are apointable, the President is still expected to demonstrate to the public that he or she has applied his or her mind impartially in making the final selection.
“This cannot be tested without the public knowing the criteria that the President is obliged to apply in selecting one of the three candidates recommended for each vacancy.
“I, therefore, recommend that criteria be developed and published, which the President can be held accountable for when he or she makes the final selection.”
He also urged the JSC to publish the names of candidates recommended for appointment.
“This must be accompanied by a score sheet indicating how each of the candidates performed during the selection process.
“This would enhance transparency in a great deal and it would boost public confidence in the fairness of the selection process.
“Despite the 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, resulting in some of the judges being removed from office while others have resigned.”
Another law expert, Sheila Kanyangarara, called for improved transparency in the judicial system.
“As lawyers, we know that the public nominates and the president also nominates. We need to know who nominated who, it must be known. This also includes the short-listing part.
“We also need to know the final report that is prepared by the tribunal on how judges are dismissed, because if we do not know, then how do we prepare the incoming judges so they do not make the same mistake, to be of good character, accountable 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 us not take the pedestrian meaning of the work and understand that there is this thing called confidentiality.
“As the commission, we cannot say that we have not made any mistakes since we started to implement the provisions of the Constitution.
“We are taking every opportunity to continue to improve and make the process of the appointment of judges to be as perfect as possible,”he said.
