Global Judicial Integrity Network Updates Special Edition 'Views' Review | Page 29

VIEWS The Importance of Transparency in Judicial Selections and Appointments Chris Oxtoby is a lawyer and senior researcher at the Democratic Governance and Rights Unit at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. Justice Alfred Mavedzenge is also a judicial researcher at the Democratic Governance and Rights Unit at the University of Cape Town. In October 2018, the Southern African Chief Justices’ Forum (SACJF) formally adopted the Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines on the Selection and Appointment of Judicial Officers. The Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines, which have previously been discussed in a ‘Views’ piece by Justice Sanji Monageng, are significant, as they are the first such guidelines to be developed in Africa, by an African institution, in response to specific circumstances that pertain to Africa. Thus, the adoption of the Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines is an embodiment of the spirit of finding African solutions to Africa’s governance challenges. The document comprises 15 best practice principles for the selection and appointment of judicial officers, which are underscored by best practice guidelines. The Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines cover the full range of the selection and appointment process, from the initial identification of candidates to the formal act of the final appointment. The importance of transparency is paramount, and it is identified in the Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines as an overarching principle that should “permeate every stage” of the selection and appointment process. As indicated in the explanatory text, transparency is a cross- cutting principle that is necessary for enhancing the integrity of, as well as public confidence in, the process. 1 The adoption of the Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines is an embodiment of the spirit of finding African solutions to Africa’s governance challenges. Participants in the research that underpins the Lilongwe Principles and Guidelines repeatedly identified transparency as being crucial to ensuring public confidence in the judicial selection and appointment process, and thus ultimately to the legitimacy of that process. In several jurisdictions, concerns were raised about vacancies not being advertised, and a lack of information about who shortlists candidates and by what criteria. Based upon this input, transparency finds specific application in several provisions: principle vii, which requires that objective criteria for selection be pre-set and publicly advertised and principle ix, which provides that candidates be sourced according to a consistent and transparent process. A lack of transparency in these parts of the process leaves it vulnerable to perceptions of manipulation, improper reasons for the selection of unqualified candidates and similar shortcomings. One particular aspect of the selection process that is often contentious is the criteria by which judicial officers are chosen. Contestation 29