Search

The views and experiences of the judges are important for the performance of their duties, as well as for the improvement of their social and professional position. Therefore, the topic of this paper is the suggestions for improving the independence of the judiciary, which come from the representatives of the judicial profession. The paper is based on the results of extensive empirical research of the judges from all courts of general jurisdiction in Serbia. For the interpretation of the respondents’ answers (N=599), thematic analysis was used, allowing us to further categorize the received statements by the perspectives of the respondents. The conclusion is that judges see the greatest space for improvement in the area of institutional guarantees of independence, while they are significantly less oriented towards guarantees of personal independence. Apart from the theoretical contribution, the paper primarily has a practical goal in advocating social change, i.e. a normative framework based on the guidelines that come from those to whom the regulations refer.

The article focuses on the use of the categories of «permanent population» and «existing population» while applying the regional coefficients in determining the basic amount of salary of a judge, since the judge’s salary guarantees the independence of the judge and is an integral part of his constitutional legal status. Attention is drawn to the fact that, since the judge’s salary can be determined only by the Law of Ukraine «On Judicial System and Status of Judges» the issue of the uniqueness of the application of regional coefficients requires an additional focus of scholars and practitioners, which, in turn, is related to the uncertainty of the provisions of paragraphs 2, 3, 4, Part 4 of the Art. 135 of the above mentioned Law. Determination of the regional coefficient for the calculation of the judge’s salary substantiates the feasibility of applying regional coefficients in practice based on the data, in particular, the basic indicators of the effectiveness of the courts of settlements, population of which exceed 1 million and total population of which is less than 100 thousand. Relevant comparative data on the burden on judges of such courts is provided. Based on the obtained empirical data, it is concluded that there are ambiguities in the use of the categories «existing population» and «permanent population» by the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine while approving staffing of courts in the period of 2017-2020 on the example of Odesa City, despite the relatively constant number of permanent and existing population in the city during this period. The necessity to apply the category of «existing population» in determining the basic salary of a judge is argued, as well as the advisability of amending the paragraphs 2-4 of Part 4 of the Art. 135 of the Law of Ukraine «On Judicial System and Status of Judges» in regard to the need for uniform application of this rule in practice and ensuring that the social guarantees of judicial independence are respected.

The article analyses the legal status of persons sitting on the State Tribunal in order to determine the legal nature of the function of a member of the State Tribunal. The State Tribunal in Poland is basically a dead institution and it is reasonable to examine the reasons for this phenomenon. In connection with this, research was conducted on how to create the personal composition of this body, and on the independence of its members and their apoliticality. It turns out that the legal formula on which the State Tribunal bases its existence in Poland is seriously flawed. Members of the State Tribunal were not assured all guarantees of judicial independence. Consequently, those sitting on the State Tribunal -- with the exception of the chairman of this body -- are not judges and should be identified as members of the State Tribunal. The work also formulates de lege ferenda comments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]