Ad-hoc evaluation of judges: panacea or Procust’s bed?

Abstract

This study is reserved for the analysis of the problem of "special" evaluation of the Moldovan judicial system. The article reflects the purpose, necessity, justification, guarantees, international standards, but also the risks of ad hoc evaluation of judges. Any evaluation procedure of judges must pursue the sole purpose of enhancing the performances of judges. Ad hoc evaluation of judges may be necessary and justified if it is demonstrated that the judicial system is compromised to such an extreme degree and depth that the application of ordinary measures to ensure the evaluation and accountability of judges is not feasible to guarantee judicial independence, impartiality and integrity. In such a case, it is necessary to provide for a number of strict safeguards in order to provide protection to judges who conscientiously fulfill their duties. The application of measures to purify the judiciary without taking into account the international standards of fair trial or the basic principles of the independence of judges will compromise the intended objective, that of strengthening the judiciary, and will, on the contrary, undermine it.