DISCRETIONARY POWERS OF BODIES THAT ASSESS A CANDIDATE FOR THE POSITION OF A JUDGE IN TERMS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND INTEGRITY

Abstract

The article examines the concept and legal grounds for the exercise of discretionary powers by state authorities that make decisions on the compliance of a candidate for the position of judge with the criteria of professional ethics and integrity. It is determined that discretionary powers are one of the important elements of the administrative and legal status of any state authority, which should facilitate the implementation of its functions, based on the principles of the rule of law and human rights. The significance of discretionary powers lies in the fact that thanks to them, a state authority has certain limits of discretion when making an optimal decision, since the norms of the law are not able to foresee all possible variants of actual circumstances or behavior of subjects of legal relations. However, the scope of discretionary powers is not unlimited, and in some cases they may be recognized as being exercised in violation of human rights, and therefore cannot be justified. The paper analyzes international standards for the exercise of discretionary powers, and conducts a comparative analysis of the compliance of national legislation with certain international standards. Special attention is paid to the study of the legal positions of the Supreme Court regarding the recognition of unfounded individual decisions of the Supreme Court of Justice and the Supreme Judicial Council on the suitability/ unsuitability of candidates for judicial positions, as well as the reasons and motives for such unfoundedness. It is proven that the limits of discretionary powers can be quite wide, especially when assessing such subjective categories as “integrity”, “ethics”, “morality”, etc. But at the same time they must be exercised in compliance with procedural aspects, as well as the principles of proportionality, adversarial nature, equality, and the candidate’s access to the entire volume of information on the basis of which such an important and principled decision is made regarding him.