ROMANIAN HIGH JUDICIAL COUNCIL – BETWEEN ANALOGY OF LAW AND ETHICAL TRIFLES

Judicial councils are State institutions created to ensure the independence of judicial systems from political in uence, while providing a reasonable level of magistrates’ accountability as a professional body. A common feature of judicial councils is that they decide upon the selection and promotion of magistrates, and enforce (disciplinary) sanctions for magistrates. In order to guarantee their independence from potential in uences of political nature, the majority of States decided to grant judicial councils constitutional status, thus hoping to secure both their role and the performance of functions assigned to them. Judicial councils are deemed necessary for the proper functioning of judicial systems, but one might as well infer their uselessness or even damaging in uence on the quality of justice administration. The composition and attributions of the Romanian Judicial Council (CSM) illustrate the acknowledgement of a higher degree of isolation of the judicial system from the other two powers in the State, feature which can explain the lack of accountability of CSM to both State powers and citizens. Consequently, it is necessary to revise the regulatory framework underpinning the CSM operations and composition.