PARAGUAY: IMPLEMENTING NEW SELECTION CRITERIA FOR

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ASUNCION 000357

SIPDIS

STATE FOR WHA/BSC
STATE PASS TO USTR FOR SCRONIN, LYANG
TREASURY FOR OSIA MAUREEN WAFER
COMMERCE ITA SARAH COOK
NSC FOR KIMBERLY BRIER
SOUTHCOM FOR POLAD

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PGOV PA KCRM
SUBJECT: PARAGUAY: IMPLEMENTING NEW SELECTION CRITERIA FOR
JUDGES, PROSECUTORS, AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS


1. SUMMARY: In April, the Government of Paraguay will
implement a new program of selection criteria for judges,
prosecutors, and public defenders, to be managed by the
Council of Magistrates. This is a significant step in
assuring a more independent and impartial judiciary and
public ministry, reducing chances for political influence and
installing a merit-based selection mechanism. Following
increasing political, civil society, and media pressure, the
Council of Magistrates recently adopted an internal
regulation that sets forth criteria for selecting judges,
members of courts of appeals, prosecutors, and public
defenders. For the first time judicial positions will be
filled by candidates who will be competing on pre-established
and defined criteria. END SUMMARY.


2. The Council of Magistrates is a constitutionally mandated
institution, composed of eight members, with the authority to
nominate and select members of the judiciary, including
members of the courts of appeals, judges, prosecutors, and
public defenders. Among the council's members are two
representatives of the congress, one representative of the
executive branch, two representatives of law schools, two
representatives of the Paraguayan Bar Association, and one
representative of the Supreme Court.


3. Currently, the process for judicial appointments is not
transparent and subject to political intervention and opaque
practices. Concern about the lack of transparency prompted
the Executive Branch, civil society organizations, and the
press to strongly pressure for reform of the selection
process for judicial officials. On February 16, the Council
adopted an internal regulation that established criteria for
the selection of judges, appellate court members,
prosecutors, and public defenders. The regulation
establishes a grading system based on six items
(psychological and vocational testing, general studies exams
and subject-matter specific testing, relevant advanced
degrees, job experience, work experience within the
judiciary, and a personal interview). The criteria adopted
specifically defines each item and allocates points for each,
allowing for a total of 1000 points to be earned. The new
process establishes a more transparent, merit based mechanism
for measuring potential candidates, and limits subjectivity
to the interview process, which accounts for twenty-percent
of the total score. However, the criteria rate job
experience and other work experience within the judiciary
very low, each earning a total of 50 points. The Council of
Magistrates will apply these criteria for the first time on
April 5, 2005, when it administers the first series of
examinations to more than 800 candidates for criminal
prosecutor positions.


4. Critics have called the new system unconstitutional on
the basis that it provides unequal access to examinations and
heavily emphasizes post-graduate education programs which are
needed to fulfill selection criteria. According to POLOFF
conversations with members of the judiciary and prosecutors,
some agree that the new system poses significant obstacles
for candidates from the interior departments (all departments
outside of the capital region) as all testing, interviews,
and continuing legal education courses will take place in
Asuncion. Additionally, a prosecutor told POLOFF that each
individual is responsible for paying any fees associated with
the examinations and his/her travel costs to Asuncion--which
could be a weekly expense for some courses that run each
Saturday--potentially deterring candidates from submitting
their applications. One prosecutor complained to POLOFF that
every five years members of the judiciary must reapply for
their position and will be subject to the new selection
criteria. (NOTE: While inconvenient to current members of the
judiciary, re-evaluating renewal applicants every five years,
is actually a positive step in that the system, in theory,
should screen applicants with the new selection criteria and
eradicate corrupt individuals appointed in the past.)


5. Post's USAID Mission has been working with the Council
for over a year to implement a strategy for combating
corruption within the judiciary. A primary component of this
strategy includes establishing new selection criteria for
judges and prosecutors. The USAID Mission also is supporting
the Council of Magistrates in implementing software and in
creating a database to be used as an electronic registry of
potential job applicants. Post will continue to monitor the
deployment of the new criteria and report any further
reactions or developments septel.
KEANE