It is proposed to create a legal opportunity for appeals of the decisions of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on bringing the judge to disciplinary action and suspending the judge’s powers. The 4 members of the SJC will carry out the examination on bringing the judge to disciplinary action.
The SJV mentioned number of judges will be different by every disciplinary proceedings and will include two members elected by the Judges’ General Assembly and the National Assembly. The investigation of the complaint against the decision brought the judge to disciplinary action will carry out the SJC with the members not included in the investigation for bringing the judge to disciplinary action by the given disciplinary action.
Two-month term was designed for the investigation of the complaint, as a result of which the SJC will be able to remove the decision on bringing the judge to disciplinary action and refuse the mediation of bringing the judge to disciplinary action or appoint other kind of disciplinary penalty. There is also an opportunity to remove the decision on refusing the mediation and bring the judge to disciplinary action and leave the decision unchanged.
On October 20, at the sitting of the NA Standing Committee on State and Legal Affairs, while presenting the bill designing addenda and amendments to the constitutional law the RA Judicial Code, the RA Minister of Justice informed that after the first reading the Government submitted proposals in written form.
Read also
“The purpose of the legislative regulation is to set a complaint mechanism for making decisions by the SJC on brining the judge to disciplinary action, which is also the demand of GRECO,” the Deputy Chair of the Committee Arusyak Julhakyan noted in her co-report.
The Committee Chair Vladimir Vardanyan informed that there is endorsement of the Venice Commission on the draft/ He added that there was no unified perception between the GRECO and the Venice Commission of the complaint procedure. Touching upon the peculiarities of the procedure, he noted that if those acts are not subject to complaint, then there would be problems regarding the judicial protection. If those are appealed in more subordinate court, then in certain terms the SJC further role is impeded. According to Vladimir Vardanyan, the third version, which is though not a final decision, but allows to carry out the assumed commitment. “The approach that SJC act can be disputed in the Court of First Instance, is much more dangerous,” the MP noted.
The Secretary of Armenia Faction Artsvik Minasyan tried to clarify if the means of already applied action had been a subject of dispute or not. In response, the Minister informed the old decisions made by the SJC are not possible to review with this mechanism. “In the Lower Chamber 4 judges review the act, then six judges, who were involved in the decision made by the Lower Chamber, review, it means the same person cannot review the act,” Grigor Minasyan clarified.
Artsvik Minasyan said that their Faction will vote against the bill, stemming from the fact that even that solution does not overcome the constitutional regulation, by which the SJC is recognized as that is with its complete members, but not with the delegated power. To his conviction, unequal condition will be created towards the judge already brought to disciplinary action.
As a result of voting, the initiative was endorsed.
National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia