2019-03-21

West Bank

West Bank / position paper

MUSAWA's Monitoring Report on the Judicial Competition for the Appointment of Magistrates 2019

The head and members of the High Judicial Council,

Subject: MUSAWA's Monitoring Report on the Judicial Competition for the Appointment of Magistrates 2019

Further to the letter sent by your distinguished council on 4/3/2019, which includes an invitation to take part in the monitoring process over both the written and oral exams of the mentioned judicial competition, MUSAWA nominated two of its members, Adv. Angham Mansour, the Legal Monitoring Officer, and Ms. Ruba Bakeer, Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, to represent the center in the exam, which was held on 7/3/2019 at the Modern University College, with the participation of 124 candidates distributed in two halls located in the second floor of the college. The first hall included 12 candidates, while the rest of the candidates had their exams in the other hall, whereas both halls were under the supervision of a committee headed by the High Court Judge, Eman Naser Al-Deen, and the membership of the High Court Judges, Farid Aqel and Bassam Hijjawi, the Court of Appeal judge, Hazem Dkeidek, and the enforcement judge, Kamal Jabr. 

The exam was held between 10:00 am and 1:00 pm, noting that 150 candidates were supposed to attend it, but 25 of them did not show up. MUSAWA’s team did not record any negative remarks on the regular exam procedures or the behavior of the oversight committee, which indicates that the exam procedures meet the adopted legal standards, including closing the exam papers duly. MUSAWA’s team recorded that the oversight committee adopted the open book system, as the candidates were only allowed to view the legislative texts separately from other legal references, studies, commentaries or provisions, noting that each of the representatives of the Palestinian Bar’s Association, Al-Haq Organizations, and MUSAWA, have monitored the exam from the beginning to the end, in addition to Aman and the Independent Commission for Human Rights- ICHR, whose representatives played a partial monitoring role.  

On the other hand, MUSAWA’s team monitored the oral interview that was held at the office of Judge Eman Naser Al-Deen with the participation of the entire membership of the committee, and the attendance of only three candidates, who passed the written exam. MUSAWA’s team did not record any negative remarks on the exam procedures concerning time, questions, halls management, and the committee’s communications approach.  The competition grades were divided as follows: 50% for the written exam while adopting 33% as a passing grade, and 50% for the oral exam while giving 30% for the oral exam, and 20% for the personality of the candidate.

MUSAWA’s team met the head of the committee in order to discuss a number of standards and regulations, including the nature of the questions, the public announcement of the results, and the nature of the decision issued by the committee, whether it is a placement decision or a recommendation to the High Judicial Council, which has the choice to accept or reject it, in addition to discussing whether the procedures of the competition require the security service approval or which known for the Security Clearance Procedure, and whether the system of the competition provides a scope for challenging the exam results or asking for reviewing them.  

As a result of MUSAWA’s oversight role over the competition, MUSAWA recommends the following:

1-    Giving the candidates, who did not pass the written exam, the opportunity to file an objection and have their papers graded in their presence, noting that MUSAWA does not recommend a public announcement of the written exam’s results, due to the potential prejudice it may cause to the candidates.

2-    MUSAWA agrees with the position of the committee, which perceives that the questions of the two exams are compatible with the requirements and conditions of the judicial post, by taking the post’s importance and delicacy into consideration, and compatible with the national rules and the international standards.

3-    MUSAWA is looking for a connection between the Palestinian universities and the High Judicial Council to discuss the academic level of the graduates, and to take the needed actions to ensure its compatibility with the national need and the legal competencies.

4-    MUSAWA hopes that the Palestinian Bar’s Association firmly views the results, and take the needed proceedings to develop the training systems and the legal education of the association; in a way that ensures the bottom line of the legal gift that must be possessed by the applicant lawyer.

5-   Respecting the governmental official decision not to adopt the Security Clearance Procedure as a condition for the appointments of judicial posts, and to adopt the legal conditions provided in article 16 of the judicial authority’s law. 

6-    Considering the decision issued by the committee as an appointment decision, and the decision of the High Judicial Council as a tool for ensuring the transparency and integrity of it and to prevent any intervention in the procedures of the judicial posts.

7-    MUSAWA reiterates that the judicial post, as a social right, is custody that care must be taken to ensure its seriousness and privacy, to enable choosing its officials according to the standards of neutrality and independence.

MUSAWA hopes that your distinguished council, the committee of the judicial competition and the competent bodies, particularly the Palestinian Bar’s Association, and law faculties, to take its remarks into consideration,

With All Due Respect

Issued on 21/3/2019

MUSAWA’s Monitoring Team