Strasbourg, 15 October 2008
CCJE-BU(2008)3
CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN JUDGES
(CcjE)
4th meeting of the Bureau
Tartu (Estonia), 17 June 2008
MEETING REPORT
1. The Bureau of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) held its 4th meeting in Tartu (Estonia) on 17 June 2008, with Ms Julia LAFFRANQUE (Estonia) in the chair.
2. The following Bureau members were also present:
§ Mr Alain LACABARATS (France)
§ Mr Gerhard REISSNER (Austria)
Mr Orlando AFONSO (Portugal), Vice-Chair of the CCJE, had apologised for being unable to attend.
3. The agenda is set out in the Appendix.
1. Preparation of the 9th plenary meeting of the CCJE
4. Members were reminded that, under the CCJE’s terms of reference, draft Opinion No.11 was to be sent to the European Court of Human Rights for comments. It was accordingly suggested that a working meeting between representatives of the Court and the Bureau, extended to include any CCJE members who so wished, be held alongside the plenary meeting in November. This meeting could also provide an opportunity to discuss the Court’s use of the opinions and inter-institutional relations between the Court and the CCJE. The conclusions of this discussion could be presented at the plenary meeting.
5. The Bureau felt it was too early to embark on a formal dialogue with the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. It was nevertheless decided that once adopted, Opinion No. 11 would be formally submitted to the ECJ.
2. Examination of the situation of judges in various member states
6. The allegations that judges and prosecutors in Italy had been spied on by the intelligence services were discussed in the presence of Mr Raffaele Sabato (Italy). Mr Sabato told the Bureau that a preliminary investigation was under way in Rome. It was agreed to keep this item on the CCJE agenda and to discuss it further at the plenary meeting.
7. The Chair told the Bureau about a letter which the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights had sent to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe concerning the Polish President’s refusal to appoint 9 judges. Poland’s Constitutional Court was to give a decision on whether the presidential power in question was a discretionary or mandatory one. The CCJE member for Poland could provide an update on the situation at the plenary meeting.
8. As Mr Afonso was absent, the item on Portugal was not discussed.
9. With regard to the request from the Europe Foundation concerning the status of deputy judges in Spain, the Bureau noted the position of Spain’s General Council of the Judiciary which had said it was willing to receive representatives from the Foundation in order to discuss the matter. The Bureau felt there was no need in that case for the CCJE to revert to this question, which had been duly clarified.
10. The discussion on the draft law on judges in Serbia was held in the presence of Ms Spomenka ZARIĆ (Serbia). The Association of Serbian Judges had asked the CCJE to examine a draft legislative reform under which judges currently in office might not be re-elected or re-appointed.
Ms ZARIĆ told the Bureau that the situation remained unchanged following the recent elections: the draft laws were still on the table. The Venice Commission had visited the country in March 2008.
The Bureau instructed Mr Sabato to draft a letter:
§ setting out the basic principles concerning the irremovability of judges,
§ drawing attention to the work being carried out by the Venice Commission, based around Article 7 of the Serbian Constitution, and indicating that the CCJE shared the Commission’s views,
§ stating that when the time was right and the conditions were in place, the CCJE would be willing to meet with the main Serbian authorities competent in this area.
The Bureau agreed to keep this item on the CCJE’s agenda.
- Future work of the CCJE
11. With regard to the work planned in 2009 on the relationship between judges and prosecutors, the Bureau agreed that it made sense to prepare a joint opinion with the CCPE. Suitable arrangements would need to be agreed so that the CCJE and CCPE working groups could work partly on their own and come together for joint sessions, e.g. by holding these meetings in the same week so that there would be one or two days common to both groups.
A joint European conference of judges and prosecutors was to be held in 2009 on this subject. It would have to be decided whether this conference was meant to provide food for thought for the CCJE and CCPE’s joint work on the opinion or rather to present the findings of the two working groups.
The Secretariat said that the CCPE had compiled a list of areas to be addressed in this opinion. It was agreed that the CCJE Bureau would add to this list, which was to be confirmed at the plenary meeting.
It was further pointed out that the CEPEJ report on European judicial systems provided useful, basic information about the status of judges and prosecutors and how the two professions were organised in member states. Due account should be taken of this when preparing the opinion.
12. With regard to the future work of the CCJE, the Bureau decided to propose at the plenary that the committee look at the execution of court decisions. It was, however, agreed that other topics could be suggested at the plenary meeting and participants asked for their opinions around the table.
4. Development of synergies with other committees
13. The Bureau learned that the draft revision of Recommendation No. R (94)12, submitted to the CDCJ by the CEPEJ as part of the CEPEJ’s action plan for better use of CCJE opinions (CEPEJ(2005)11) and prepared by the CJ-S-JUST (with MM. LACABARATS and REISSNER representing the CCJE) had not been accepted in its current form by the CDCJ. An enlarged working group would be instructed to continue this work. The CCJE would be involved and would appoint its representative in due course.
14. It was agreed that Mr. REISSNER would represent the CCJE at the next plenary meeting of the CEPEJ (2 – 3 July 2008) and Mr LACABARATS at the plenary meeting of the CCPE (15 – 17 October) if his timetable allowed (if not, Mr REISSNER could stand in for him).
Annexe
AGENDA / ORDRE DU JOUR
1. Opening of the meeting
Ouverture de la réunion
2. Adoption of the agenda
Adoption de l’ordre du jour
3. Information by the President of the CCJE and the Secretariat
Informations par le Président du CCJE et le Secrétariat
4. Preparation of the 9th meeting of the CCJE (Strasbourg, 12-14 November 2008)
Préparation de la 9ème réunion du CCJE (Strasbourg, 12-14 novembre 2008)
5. Examination of the situation in Serbia, in Poland, in Spain, in Portugal
Examen de la situation en Serbie, en Pologne, en Espagne, au Portugal
6. Work of the Task Force (Serbia)
Travaux de la Task Force (Serbie)
7. Future work of the CCJE
Travaux futurs du CCJE
8. Development of synergies with other committees (EC Forum, CDCJ, etc)
Développement des synergies avec d’autres comités (Forum de la CE, CDCJ, etc).
9. Any other business
Divers.