Kiri

European Commission, Rue de la Loi 200, B - 1049 Brussels

Commissioner Michael McGrath

Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law

and Consumer Protection

Brussels,

Dear Minister Pakosta,

Let me first thank you for the constructive discussion we had in December 2024, during our

meeting in the margins of the Justice and Home Affairs Council. It was a pleasure meeting you.

I understand that the Estonian Government is preparing a reform to strengthen the judicial

independence by transferring powers from the Ministry of Justice and Digitalisation to a new

Council for the Administration of Courts. This reform was examined in the 2024 Rule of Law

Report, which recommended Estonia to “[c]ontinue the efforts to reform the Council for the

Administration of Courts, taking into account European Standards on councils for the

judiciary”.

I welcome your willingness and efforts to further strengthen the judicial independence of judges

in Estonia by reforming the Council for the Administration of Courts and giving it more powers.

Let me stress that the Commission is supporting self-governance of judges. Furthermore, to

guide Member States when conducing such reforms, there is a set of European Standards

regarding their composition and functioning1. These standards are explicitly referred to in the

Commission’s recommendation.

The Commission would be delighted to report positively on the follow-up by Estonia to this

recommendation. However, I understand that the currently envisaged composition of the

Council does not appear to take into account the aforementioned European Standards, as much

as it foresees a minority of judges chosen by their peers2 and up to three active deputies and

minister with the right to vote. The combination of these two elements could result in a

politicisation of the Council and expose judges and the judiciary as a whole to influence from

the executive or the legislative powers. As we have seen in other Member States, both among

EU and Council of Europe states, this risk of politicisation is not an abstract one. The relevant

European standards precisely aim at mitigating this risk, based on the experiences made over

many years.

Ms Liisa-Ly Pakosta

Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs

1 Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, paras. 26-29:

“Not less than half the members of such councils should be judges chosen by their peers from all levels of the

judiciary and with respect for pluralism inside the judiciary”. See also Venice Commission Opinion (CDL-

AD(2020)035), para. 44, explaining that judges “elected by their peers” do not include the ex officio members

of a Council. See also CCJE Opinion No. 24 (2021) on the evolution of the Councils for the Judiciary and their

role in independent and impartial judicial systems, p. 4, B. b): “prospective members, whether judges or not,

[…] should not be active politicians or members of the executive or the legislature;” 2 Five out of eleven members.

European Commission, Rue de la Loi 200, B - 1049 Brussels

Commissioner Michael McGrath

Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law

and Consumer Protection

As the draft law is not yet tabled, it would be a very opportune moment to ensure that it takes

into account the European Standards. The services of the Commission are at your disposal for

further exchanges on this matter to further improve the composition of the Council.

Considering the sensitivity of such reform, you could furthermore consider consulting the

European Network of Councils for the Judiciary and the Venice Commission.

I am looking forward to continuing our close cooperation on strengthening the rule of law in

the Union.

Your sincerely,

Michael McGrath

Electronically signed on 19/03/2025 21:34 (UTC+01) in accordance with Article 11 of Commission Decision (EU) 2021/2121

European Commission, Rue de la Loi 200, B - 1049 Brussels

Commissioner Michael McGrath

Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law

and Consumer Protection

Brussels,

Dear Minister Pakosta,

Let me first thank you for the constructive discussion we had in December 2024, during our

meeting in the margins of the Justice and Home Affairs Council. It was a pleasure meeting you.

I understand that the Estonian Government is preparing a reform to strengthen the judicial

independence by transferring powers from the Ministry of Justice and Digitalisation to a new

Council for the Administration of Courts. This reform was examined in the 2024 Rule of Law

Report, which recommended Estonia to “[c]ontinue the efforts to reform the Council for the

Administration of Courts, taking into account European Standards on councils for the

judiciary”.

I welcome your willingness and efforts to further strengthen the judicial independence of judges

in Estonia by reforming the Council for the Administration of Courts and giving it more powers.

Let me stress that the Commission is supporting self-governance of judges. Furthermore, to

guide Member States when conducing such reforms, there is a set of European Standards

regarding their composition and functioning1. These standards are explicitly referred to in the

Commission’s recommendation.

The Commission would be delighted to report positively on the follow-up by Estonia to this

recommendation. However, I understand that the currently envisaged composition of the

Council does not appear to take into account the aforementioned European Standards, as much

as it foresees a minority of judges chosen by their peers2 and up to three active deputies and

minister with the right to vote. The combination of these two elements could result in a

politicisation of the Council and expose judges and the judiciary as a whole to influence from

the executive or the legislative powers. As we have seen in other Member States, both among

EU and Council of Europe states, this risk of politicisation is not an abstract one. The relevant

European standards precisely aim at mitigating this risk, based on the experiences made over

many years.

Ms Liisa-Ly Pakosta

Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs

1 Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, paras. 26-29:

“Not less than half the members of such councils should be judges chosen by their peers from all levels of the

judiciary and with respect for pluralism inside the judiciary”. See also Venice Commission Opinion (CDL-

AD(2020)035), para. 44, explaining that judges “elected by their peers” do not include the ex officio members

of a Council. See also CCJE Opinion No. 24 (2021) on the evolution of the Councils for the Judiciary and their

role in independent and impartial judicial systems, p. 4, B. b): “prospective members, whether judges or not,

[…] should not be active politicians or members of the executive or the legislature;” 2 Five out of eleven members.

European Commission, Rue de la Loi 200, B - 1049 Brussels

Commissioner Michael McGrath

Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law

and Consumer Protection

As the draft law is not yet tabled, it would be a very opportune moment to ensure that it takes

into account the European Standards. The services of the Commission are at your disposal for

further exchanges on this matter to further improve the composition of the Council.

Considering the sensitivity of such reform, you could furthermore consider consulting the

European Network of Councils for the Judiciary and the Venice Commission.

I am looking forward to continuing our close cooperation on strengthening the rule of law in

the Union.

Your sincerely,

Michael McGrath

Electronically signed on 19/03/2025 21:34 (UTC+01) in accordance with Article 11 of Commission Decision (EU) 2021/2121