Lawyers demand public scorecards in judges appointment

Legal experts have called for increased transparency in Zimbabwe's judicial appointment process, with a particular emphasis on publishing the scorecards used to assess candidates. The proposal aims to ensure a more open and accountable system for appointing judges, enhancing public confidence in the fairness of the process.

Speaking at the Law Society of Zimbabwe's Summer School conference last Friday, law consultant Justice Mavedzenge criticized the current system, particularly the President's role in appointing judges. According to Section 180 of Zimbabwe's Constitution, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is responsible for advertising judicial vacancies, inviting nominations, conducting interviews, and compiling a shortlist of qualified candidates for submission to the President, who must then make the final appointment.

Mavedzenge argued that while the JSC conducts public interviews, the transparency of the process is compromised at key stages. Specifically, the public is often not informed about the candidates who are shortlisted for appointment after the interviews, and there is no clear, publicly known criterion for how the President makes the final selection.

"The process of selecting and appointing new judges lacks transparency in certain critical stages," Mavedzenge said. "At times, the public is not informed by the JSC of the candidates who were shortlisted for appointment after the interviews. There seems to be a lack of transparency and objectivity in the exercise of the powers by the President when he decides to appoint."

He stressed that the absence of known criteria makes it difficult for the public to understand why certain candidates are selected over others. Mavedzenge recommended that relevant authorities develop and publish clear criteria to ensure that the President's decisions can be evaluated and that public confidence in the process is restored.

"Although one can argue that all the candidates shortlisted by the JSC are appointable, the President is still expected to demonstrate to the public that he or she has applied his or her mind impartially in making the final selection," Mavedzenge added. "This cannot be tested without the public knowing the criteria that the President is obliged to apply in selecting one of the three candidates recommended for each vacancy."

He further called for the JSC to publish the names of candidates recommended for appointment, along with a score sheet that details how each candidate performed during the selection process. This, Mavedzenge said, would significantly enhance transparency and help build public trust in the judicial selection system.

Despite constitutional improvements aimed at increasing transparency and objectivity in the appointment of judges, Zimbabwe's judiciary has faced numerous corruption scandals and cases of unethical conduct. Some judges have been removed from office, while others have resigned amid allegations of misconduct.

Fellow legal expert Sheila Kanyangarara also emphasized the need for better transparency in the judicial system. She suggested that both public and presidential nominations should be made clear, including the shortlisting process. Kanyangarara also called for transparency regarding the tribunal reports that determine how judges are dismissed, arguing that such information is necessary to prepare future judges to uphold good character, accountability, and ethical standards.

"As lawyers, we know that the public nominates and the President also nominates. We need to know who nominated who, it must be known. This also includes the short-listing part," Kanyangarara said. "We also need to know the final report that is prepared by the tribunal on how judges are dismissed, because if we do not know, then how do we prepare the incoming judges so they do not make the same mistakes, to be of good character, accountable, and ethical."

In response, JSC Secretary Walter Chikwanha acknowledged the need for improvement but urged caution when discussing transparency, highlighting the importance of confidentiality in certain aspects of the judicial appointment process. He emphasized that while the JSC strives for greater transparency, some information may need to remain confidential to preserve the integrity of the process.

"When we talk about transparency, let us not take the pedestrian meaning of the word and understand that there is this thing called confidentiality," Chikwanha said. "As the commission, we cannot say that we have not made any mistakes since we started to implement the provisions of the Constitution. We are taking every opportunity to continue to improve and make the process of the appointment of judges as perfect as possible."

The call for increased transparency in the judicial appointment process comes amid growing concerns about the need for an independent and impartial judiciary in Zimbabwe, with legal experts advocating for reforms that will ensure greater accountability, fairness, and public trust in the system.