The National Judicial Council (OBT) has elected Csaba Pecsenye as its head for a three-year term, the body said on Thursday.
Csaba Pecsenye appointed
Ahead of the meeting on Wednesday, the OBT received a letter from representatives of the Hungarian Judicial Association and the Res Iudicata Association protesting against the appointment, the statement said.
In response to several comments that the agreement “lacked legal grounding” and that the OBT had no mandate from judges to enter into an agreement, Pecsenye said the payment of judges and judicial employees, the preparation of legislation in connection with the judicial system, as well as opinions on relevant legislation was under the purview of the directing bodies of the judiciary, and so the agreement was compliant with the Fundamental Law and the law on the organisation and management of courts, Pecsenye said.
“The agreement itself doesn’t harm judges’ independence, although legislation as a means to achieve a certain goal does carry the danger that legislation harms judicial independence,” he said.
Commenting on the letter after a council discussion on the judges’ proposals on the agreement, Pecsenye said the decision was not “an insult to the honour of the body”. “It is possible that the OBT makes bad decisions from time to time, but that in itself doesn’t harm anyone’s honour. Rather than whipping up emotions, it would be better to find solutions to any possible bad decisions,” he said.
“A small portion of the comments” referred to the need to tackle the issue, and that the judicial system needed a reform, Pecsenye said. He noted that under the Fundamental Law, parliament is the main body of the people’s representation in Hungary, which drafts laws, adopts the budget and its implementation and elects the prime minister, among other tasks. The legislative and executive powers have a right to define the framework of the system of courts, but must obtain the opinion of courts when shaping the judicial system; one of the ways to do that is by involving judicial bodies, including the OBT, in the legislative process, he said. Accordingly, the OBT is part of the process of legislative preparation for which it obtains the opinions of ogranisations representing the interests of judges in the process, he said.
“Our goal is to concentrate on … giving our opinion on the legislation before us … the OBT will also channel the opinion of ogranisations representing the interests of various groups,” Pecsenye said.
Read also: