The Plenary Session of the Venice Commission concluded yesterday that the system for electing the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), the governing body of judges, which is supported by the Government, “fails to meet European standards.” This is due to the current system leaving the final election of candidates in the hands of the Parliament, which the Commission views as a “political filter.”
In contrast, the alternative system, in which the judges themselves elect the 12 members of judicial origin, seeks to “eliminate politicization” and does align with the standards advocated by the Council of Europe’s advisory body on constitutional matters.
The Venice Commission agreed to study the proposed reform of the CGPJ election method at the request of the CGPJ itself. The Council was unable to reach a consensus on a single proposal and instead submitted two diverging models.
The first model, supported by 10 members from the progressive sector and aligned with the Government, maintains the final vote for judicial members by the Parliament (Cortes Generales). The second model, supported by 10 members from the conservative sector, proposes that those members be elected by the judges themselves. This latter system is the one backed by the Popular Party (Partido Popular).
