Übersetzung für "La nomination des juges au Canada " (Französisch → Englisch) :

During that time, as foreseen in the agreement, the Commission will work with Canada to further elaborate certain parameters of the new system, like the selection of judges, the access by small and medium enterprises to the new system and the appeal mechanism.

100. Recalls the agreement in principle between the Parliament and the Council according to which the number of judges must be increased; emphasises that in these circumstances it is urgent to find agreement as soon as possible on the nomination of the additional judges to the Court; puts EUR 2 million in reserve for the appointment of nine new judges and calls on the Court to present to the Council and the Parliament an updated evaluation of the additional financial needs for new judges ...[+++] and staff; expects that agreement in the Council will be reached as soon as possible and that the legislative procedure will be finalised by 1 October 2015; insists that the need for additional staff corresponding to the nomination of nine judges should be evaluated in a prudent way;

99. Recalls the agreement in principle between the Parliament and the Council according to which the number of judges must be increased; emphasises that in these circumstances it is urgent to find agreement as soon as possible on the nomination of the additional judges to the Court; puts EUR 2 million in reserve for the appointment of nine new judges and calls on the Court to present to the Council and the Parliament an updated evaluation of the additional financial needs for new judges ...[+++] and staff; expects that agreement in the Council will be reached as soon as possible and that the legislative procedure will be finalised by 1 October 2015; insists that the need for additional staff corresponding to the nomination of nine judges should be evaluated in a prudent way;

12. Welcomes the adoption of the Strategy and the Action Plan on the reform of the judiciary 2013-2018, built around the key principles of independence, impartiality, competence, quality of the judiciary and freedom from political interference; urges the authorities to intensify this reform in line with the recommendations of the Venice Commission, especially with regard to the role of the parliament in judicial appointments and the independence of the prosecution, and with a view to the screening process of Chapter 23, which commenced on 25 September 2013; stresses the importance of strengthening the independence of High Judicial and State Prosecutorial Councils and reducing the backlog of cases, as a necessary condition for the successf ...[+++]ul sequencing of the entire reform process; calls on the authorities to provide all the necessary resources for the Judicial Academy, which should be instrumental in guaranteeing merit-based recruitments; emphasises the need for continuous training of judges and prosecutors to deal with complex financial cases and economic crimes; urges the authorities responsible to ensure a transparent and merit-based process of appointment of judges and prosecutors as well as a solid track-record of disciplinary proceedings against the judicial personnel; insists further on the need to ensure timely justice together with the unification of jurisprudence, the publication of, and easy access to, all judicial decisions immediately after adoption and the random allocation of cases in all courts; is concerned about the legal uncertainty arising from the number of judges carrying out their duties in acting capacity; reiterates the fact that a strong and independent judiciary is key to Serbia’s capacity to meet EU membership criteria;

15. Notes that Serbia is developing a new strategy for judicial reform, and supports the efforts being made to devise a new court system in order to improve the efficiency and independence of the whole judicial system; welcomes the government’s commitment to tackling shortcomings in the reform of the judiciary, particularly by ensuring that the legal framework leaves no room for undue political influence and addressing the issues of parliament’s power to appoint judges and prosecutors and the direct political participation of officia ...[+++]ls in the work of the High Judicial and State Prosecutorial Councils; underlines the importance of adopting clear and transparent evaluation criteria for appointed judges and prosecutors that will ensure their independence and professionalism; furthermore stresses the need to implement measures, in line with the recommendations of the Venice Commission, to address the growing backlog of cases; notes that the Justice Ministry still has responsibility for capital expenditure and that this could further limit the independence of the judiciary; calls on the government to focus on the quality of reform rather than its speed, using the available technical expertise from abroad; stresses also the need for initial and continued professional training of judges and prosecutors, following the extensive changes to the law;

welcome the reforms made by Azerbaijani authorities in the judiciary, with a view to ensuring greater independence of judges, improving selection and appointment procedures and eliminating judicial corruption and susceptibility to the influence of the executive; acknowledge that the relevant laws, including the law on the Bar, have been adopted; encourage the authorities in charge to continue implementing legislation to combat corruption and focus on high-level corruption cases as well as to improve significantly the transparency of public expenditure and political party funding; emphasise the need to improve the ...[+++]independence, efficiency and resources of the judiciary; reiterate the importance of the court system functioning free from political interference; stress the need to establish a convincing track record of recruiting and appointing judges and state prosecutors based on the application of uniform, transparent, objective and nationally-applicable criteria and to build up an enforcement record of prosecutions and convictions against which progress can be measured; call for the unification of jurisprudence in order to ensure a predictable judicial system and public trust;