2016-03-20

Ramallah

West Bank

Chief Justice and members of the High Judicial Council,

Subject: Judicial appointments by the Public Prosecution

We, at MUSAWA would like to greet you and express that we know of the committee, formed by your respectful council in its session held on 13/03/2016, consisting of judges Emad Salim, Farid Akel, and Taleb Al-Bzour, for the purpose of interviewing a number of Public Prosecution members for the position of Magistrate. The candidates expressed desire to fill the position to the Acting Public Prosecutor based on an internal ad announced by Him on 16/02/2016, targeting members of the Public Prosecution. Concerning the matter, we would like to say:

1. Announcing the need to fill judicial positions, including that of court Magistrates, is exclusively limited to the High Judicial Council. Any other party is not allowed to do so, whether alone or in partnership with the High Judicial Council, expressing respect for and commitment to the uniqueness and authority given to the council. Moreover, announcing the competition by the Acting Public Prosecutor -with all due respect- in a unilateral manner represents an infringement of the council’s authority, not to mention that the announcement is not taken seriously by the Public Prosecution members themselves as it was issued by an unauthorized body in an unusual way, which in light of such procedures might make the members themselves reluctant to apply for the position.
2. Pursuant to the provisions of Articles (16), (18) and (19) of the Judicial Authority Law, announcing the need to fill judicial positions must be done in a way that ensures the announcement reaches all eligible parties, maintaining equality, seriousness and transparency, which can mark procedures taken by your respected council in its aforementioned session as a violation of the Articles mentioned above.
3. Limiting the interview and selection process to a certain party while excluding others who, according to clearly-established laws, have the right to fill the position (such as, lawyers) is a jeopardy to the rights of those excluded, wasting the principle of equality.
4. With all due respect to the Public Prosecution members, restricting a judicial position the way your council’s decision did in its session mentioned above is a waste of competencies and reflects an unjustified discrimination, especially that increasing the number of applicants for the position necessarily results in choosing the best individual to fill that position.
5. Exclusively restricting the competition and the interview for a judicial position to a certain party or to certain individuals contradicts the principle of legitimate competition and prevents those who are interested in filling the position from applying and participating in the competition on an equal footing with those who are like them.
6. Limiting the judicial competition to members of the Public Prosecution is not supported by law, for the Judicial Authority Law is devoid of any provisions that allow for filling a judicial position by transfers from Public Prosecution to judiciary positions, and considers filling a judicial position by the Public Prosecution as an initial appointment not confined to Prosecution members, but covers other categories, including lawyers. This is in accordance with the explicit provisions of Articles (16), (18) and (19) of the Judicial Authority Law. Due to all of the aforementioned aspects, the decision of your respected council regarding restricting the judicial competition to a number of the Public Prosecution members is a violation of the law and it must be cancelled.

We kindly hope that you study our memo thoroughly, and then take the appropriate legal action regarding the matter.

With all due respect,

Chairman of the Board of Directors

Lawyer Yasser Jaber

Chief Justice and members of the High Judicial Council,

Subject: Judicial appointments by the Public Prosecution

We, at MUSAWA would like to greet you and express that we know of the committee, formed by your respectful council in its session held on 13/03/2016, consisting of judges Emad Salim, Farid Akel, and Taleb Al-Bzour, for the purpose of interviewing a number of Public Prosecution members for the position of Magistrate. The candidates expressed desire to fill the position to the Acting Public Prosecutor based on an internal ad announced by Him on 16/02/2016, targeting members of the Public Prosecution. Concerning the matter, we would like to say:

1. Announcing the need to fill judicial positions, including that of court Magistrates, is exclusively limited to the High Judicial Council. Any other party is not allowed to do so, whether alone or in partnership with the High Judicial Council, expressing respect for and commitment to the uniqueness and authority given to the council. Moreover, announcing the competition by the Acting Public Prosecutor -with all due respect- in a unilateral manner represents an infringement of the council’s authority, not to mention that the announcement is not taken seriously by the Public Prosecution members themselves as it was issued by an unauthorized body in an unusual way, which in light of such procedures might make the members themselves reluctant to apply for the position.
2. Pursuant to the provisions of Articles (16), (18) and (19) of the Judicial Authority Law, announcing the need to fill judicial positions must be done in a way that ensures the announcement reaches all eligible parties, maintaining equality, seriousness and transparency, which can mark procedures taken by your respected council in its aforementioned session as a violation of the Articles mentioned above.
3. Limiting the interview and selection process to a certain party while excluding others who, according to clearly-established laws, have the right to fill the position (such as, lawyers) is a jeopardy to the rights of those excluded, wasting the principle of equality.
4. With all due respect to the Public Prosecution members, restricting a judicial position the way your council’s decision did in its session mentioned above is a waste of competencies and reflects an unjustified discrimination, especially that increasing the number of applicants for the position necessarily results in choosing the best individual to fill that position.
5. Exclusively restricting the competition and the interview for a judicial position to a certain party or to certain individuals contradicts the principle of legitimate competition and prevents those who are interested in filling the position from applying and participating in the competition on an equal footing with those who are like them.
6. Limiting the judicial competition to members of the Public Prosecution is not supported by law, for the Judicial Authority Law is devoid of any provisions that allow for filling a judicial position by transfers from Public Prosecution to judiciary positions, and considers filling a judicial position by the Public Prosecution as an initial appointment not confined to Prosecution members, but covers other categories, including lawyers. This is in accordance with the explicit provisions of Articles (16), (18) and (19) of the Judicial Authority Law. Due to all of the aforementioned aspects, the decision of your respected council regarding restricting the judicial competition to a number of the Public Prosecution members is a violation of the law and it must be cancelled.

We kindly hope that you study our memo thoroughly, and then take the appropriate legal action regarding the matter.

With all due respect,

Chairman of the Board of Directors

Lawyer Yasser Jaber