The Justice Reform Bills under review took their current form after long discussions among all parties involved.
A key issue of consultation was the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council, an issue on which the Supreme Court had expressed strong reservations in light of the provisions of the fundamental Article 157 of the Constitution. As noted in an earlier announcement of the Supreme Court, the differentiation of the positions of the Pancyprian Bar Association on this crucial issue was a development in the right direction "... and allows for the immediate advancement of the already delayed Reform"
Similarly, the convergence of positions as to the form that the Advisory Council is expected to take constitutes an additional positive element towards a favourable outcome of the Reform under discussion.
We add, to complete the picture, that the different approaches occasionally expressed among the Members of the Supreme Court as to the separation of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Constitutional Court (approaches which are fully respected and always to be expected in the context of a fruitful debate on such a serious issue), constitute their views on the necessity of such separation and not a position on the constitutional dimension of the matter.
As the Supreme Court emphasized in a previous communication, "With the very credibility of our judicial system now at stake, the intended reform presents itself as an urgent necessity", particularly with a view to the adjudication of backlogged cases at all levels and the non-repetition of the same phenomenon. We reiterate that any further delay will lead to the collapse of the judiciary, with dire, by extension, consequences for the rule of law.
Expressing the Supreme Court's intense anguish over the current state of affairs, we note again that the final completion of the reform project now falls within the exclusive competence of the House of Representatives.
EX/IK
Contents of this article including associated images are owned by PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
