Pöördumine

Empirical Questionnaire – Selection Practices of Judges Performing Constitutional Review in Europe
Dear Secretariat of the Court,
This questionnaire explores both subjective and institutional aspects of how constitutional court judges are selected across Europe. If possible, please forward the questions to at least one current constitutional judge who may answer anonymously. The researcher will use the answers solely for academic and statistical purposes, and they will not be made public.
Your response significantly contributes to the development of the empirical chapter of the doctoral dissertation.
Part I – General Information
1. Country, Institution: _______________________________________
2. Position in Court:
◦ ☐ President / Chief Justice
◦ ☐ Vice-President
◦ ☐ Judge / Justice
◦ ☐ Other (please specify): ________________________
Part II – Selection Procedure
3. Was your appointment preceded by a public hearing or formal vetting process?
◦ ☐ Yes
◦ ☐ No
◦ If yes, briefly describe the procedure: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4. Were political parties involved in any stage of the process?
◦ ☐ Yes
◦ ☐ No
◦ ☐ Uncertain
5. Are there any selection criteria used in your country that are not explicitly provided for in legislation?
◦ ☐ Yes
◦ ☐ No
◦ If yes, briefly describe: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6. In your view, the selection process in your country is primarily:
• ☐ a political
• ☐ a merit-based
• ☐ a mixed process
• ☐ Other (please specify): _______________________________________________
7. What, in your view, provides the greatest legitimacy to the body responsible for constitutional adjudication?
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8. Have you experienced a crisis of public trust surrounding the selection process?
◦ ☐ Yes
◦ ☐ No
If yes, please briefly describe the nature of the crisis: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9. Do you believe public or civil oversight is necessary during the selection of judges responsible for constitutional review?
◦ ☐ Yes
◦ ☐ No
10. Which aspect of the selection process do you consider most problematic in your country?
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
11. What legal and/or practical changes would you consider necessary in the selection system of judges responsible for constitutional review?
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III – Criteria and Transparency
12. Did the selection process include any subjective criteria (e.g. ‘high moral standards’, ‘professional recognition’, or ‘public esteem’)?
• ☐ Yes
• ☐ No
• If yes, what were they and how were they assessed during the selection process?
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
13. How transparent do you consider the selection procedure in your country? (1 = Not at all transparent, 5 = Fully transparent)
1 2 3 4 5
14. Were civil society or academic experts involved in the selection or evaluation process?
• ☐ Yes
• ☐ No
• ☐ Don’t know
• If yes, in what role or capacity did they participate?
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part IV – Reflections and Opinions
15. What, in your opinion, are the strengths of your country’s selection system for judges responsible for constitutional review?
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
16. What are the weaknesses or risks in the current system?
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
17. In your view, how could the selection procedure be improved to better safeguard the independence of judges responsible for constitutional review?
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
18. Do you think that political influence over judicial appointments has increased, decreased, or remained the same in recent years?
• ☐ Increased
• ☐ Decreased
• ☐ Remained the same
• Please elaborate on your answer, if possible: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
19. How important is public trust in the legitimacy of the selection process?
• ☐ Very important
• ☐ Important
• ☐ Somewhat important
• ☐ Not important
• Why?
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part V – Comparative Perspective (Optional)
20. Are there any selection models from other countries that you regard as good examples for ensuring an independent and impartial court of constitutional adjudication?
• ☐ Yes
• ☐ No
• If yes, which countries? _________________________________________________
21. Are there any foreign models you would consider as good examples for ensuring an independent and impartial court of constitutional adjudication? Please describe:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you very much for your contribution. Your insights will be used anonymously and contribute significantly to the empirical findings of this doctoral research.