Dissolving the Supreme Judicial Council (CSM) does not solve the problem of the judiciary, member of «I Watch» organisation Talel Ferchichi said on Thursday.
I Watch supports dismissing the members of the CSM but is opposed to «dissolving a constitutional body,» he added at a press conference in Tunis.
«The proposed structure to replace the CSM is a «weak alternative,» incapable of reforming the sector. The announcement of a provisional council shows that the state is not ready for an alternative that meets the aspirations of Tunisians.»
«Establishing the CSM on the basis of nepotism and partisan affiliations and appointing suspicious people to key judicial positions was behind the failure of this body,» Ferchichi indicated.
He stressed the need for sustainable institutions to ensure stability, warning against the monopoly of powers.
For her part, the organisation’s legal adviser Eya Riahi said Decree 11/2022 on the creation of a provisional Judicial Council contains many loopholes, notably in Article 1, which does not grant regulatory power to the president of the council. Thus, this power falls to the President of the Republic on the basis of Presidential Decree 117/2021.
She also pointed out that, with regard to the articles dealing with the composition of the council, some members are appointed in their capacity as such, while others are chosen among the retired by presidential decree, which negates any representativeness of the judges and compromises electoral legitimacy.
She also noted that Article 9, which prohibits strikes, is in conflict with the provisions of Article 39 of the Constitution on rights and freedoms.
The separation of powers is also compromised insofar as Article 16 of the decree-law establishes the possibility of withdrawing files from the general inspectorate of the Justice Ministry.
The President of the Republic had promulgated a presidential decree-law on February 1, 2022, establishing a provisional Judicial Council to replace the CSM and to enjoy financial, administrative and functional independence.
This announcement provoked several reactions from judges and political parties who expressed their indignation and their refusal of the policy of fait accompli.
Source: Tap News Agency