[ad_1]
The decision unleashed a storm of outrage: the SVP refused to vote for its own federal judge Yves Donzallaz (58). The Valais will not have to tremble for its position if the parliament elects the 38 federal judges tomorrow for the next six years. But by recommending that Donzallaz not be reelected, the SVP is jeopardizing something more fundamental from the perspective of other parties: the independence of the judiciary.
For the matter, the SP has asked that the elections of the judges be postponed. The judicial commission of parliament should first check whether the highest law enforcement officials in the country are truly independent. The SP’s motion should have no chance tomorrow, but it shows how things are currently in parliament.
“A judge is not a representative of a party!”
There is also great concern among the judges. VIEW spoke with incumbent and former federal judges. For them, one thing is for sure: the latest incident is unprecedented. It endangers the rule of Swiss law.
“It is not acceptable for a judge to be punished for a re-election failure,” says Andreas Zünd (63, SP), a federal court judge. “After the elections, a judge is no longer a representative of a party!”
However, not everyone sees it that way. “Political attempts to pressure federal judges have clearly increased,” says Julia Hänni (43, CVP), federal judge and former law professor. “It’s even more intrepid to be committed to just the constitution.” She herself never saw that the party wanted to influence her. “On the contrary: CVP expects me to report this immediately.”
Print attempts are “SVP problem”
The SVP has a different understanding of the rule of law. Not only did he harshly criticize Judge Donzallaz after unpopular rulings, he also cited him several times in Bern. Attempts to pressure the judiciary are a “specific problem of the SVP,” Donzallaz said in an “NZZ” interview. OPPOSITE VIEW he withdrew an acceptance to speak again.
Other SVP judges weren’t ready for an interview, either. In a joint statement, they simply state that judicial independence is very important. And: “In our work in the Federal Supreme Court, we do not feel harmed in any way.”
Is it necessary to change the law?
But it is not just about the judges feeling free to make their decisions. Because the separation of powers does not only affect them. “Independence is not a privilege of the judges, but of the people who are judged,” says Judge Zünd. You have the right to have a judge judge according to the law and not the game book.
Former federal judge Niccolò Raselli (76, SP) is also alarmed: “We don’t want to have Polish conditions in Switzerland!” A cry of outrage is not enough. “Now we have to do the job and change the law,” he demands.
The Justice Initiative makes a proposal in this regard: in the future, judges should be chosen by lottery and will no longer be appointed by a single party. The Federal Council rejects the initiative. The current system has proven its worth, he thinks.
It is not only Raselli who is convinced that the SVP’s attack on his own federal judge has now proven otherwise. Hänni also states: “The current system is prone to political attacks against the judiciary.”
Single term instead of re-election
Federal Judge Raselli thinks choosing a judge by lottery is a crazy idea: Chance rather than responsibility, that’s not the solution. However, seriously debatable it is a counterproposal to the initiative. The main issue here is the controversial re-election of judges every six years. “From my point of view, there are some indications that federal judges are only elected for one term, but for a longer term,” says Hänni.
However, Zünd notes: “Even the best electoral system does not guarantee the independence of the judiciary.” To do this, politicians must also respect independence.
