¹ E.g. Resnik, Judith, Judicial Selection and Democratic Theory: Demand, Supply, and Life Tenure, 26 Cardozo L.R. 597 (2015); Lee Epstein & Jack Knight & Olga Shevtsova, Comparing Judicial Selection Systems, 10 William & Mary 7 (2007); Kate Malleson, Rethinking the Merit Principle in Judicial Selection, 33 Journal of Law & Society 126 (2006); Jan van Zyl Smit, The Appointment, Tenure and Removal of Judges under Commonwealth Principles (2015); Debating Judicial Appointments in the Age of Diversity (Gee, Graham & Rackley, Erika eds., 2018).Google Scholar

² E.g. Fombad, Charles Manga, Appointment of constitutional adjudicators in Africa: some perspectives on how different systems yield similar outcomes, 46 The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 249 (2014); Tom Ginsburg, Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases (2003); Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes (Ginsburg, Tom & Moustafa, Tamir eds., 2008).Google Scholar

³ Voeten, Erik, The Politics of International Judicial Appointments: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights, 61 International Organization 669 (2007); Michal Bobek, Selecting Europe's Judges: A Critical Review of the Appointment Procedures to the European Courts (OUP 2015).Google Scholar

⁴ It needs to be admitted that in my research I am limited to the literature written in English, Slovak or Czech, hence there is a possibility that a considerable amount of research written in other languages is omitted.Google Scholar

⁵ E.g. Guarnieri, Carlo, Appointment and career of judges in continental Europe: the rise of judicial self-government, 24 Legal Studies 169 (2004); John Bell, Judiciaries within Europe. A Comparative Review (2006); Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in Europe (Giuseppe Di Federico ed., 2005); or some chapters in Appointing Judges in an Age of Judicial Power (Malleson, Kate & Russell, Peter H. eds., 2006).Google Scholar

⁶ E.g. Dimino, Michael R., The Futile Quest for a System of Judicial “Merit” Selection, 67 Albany L.R. 803 (2004).Google Scholar

⁷ Bell E.g., supra note 5, regularly addresses the representation of women; Malleson, supra note 1; Kate Malleson, The Disruptive Potential of Ceiling Quotas in Addressing the Over-Representation in the Judiciary, in Debating Judicial Appointments in the Age of Diversity 259 (Gee, Graham & Rackley, Erika eds., 2018); Erika Rackley, Women, Judging and the judiciary: from difference to diversity (2013); and even CEPEJ reports address the share of women in European judiciaries, see for instance: Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, European judicial systems: Efficiency and quality of justice 97-101 (2016).Google Scholar

⁸ Geyh, Charles G., The Endless Judicial Selection Debate and Why It Matters for Judicial Independence, 21 The Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 1259 (2008).Google Scholar

⁹ E.g. Bühlmann, Marc & Kunz, Ruth, Confidence in the Judiciary: Comparing the Independence and Legitimacy of Judicial Systems, 34 West European Politics 317 (2011); or for an overview see Marína Urbániková & Katarína Śipulová, The Failed Expectations: Does the Establishment of Judicial Councils Enhance Confidence in Courts? (in this special issue).Google Scholar

¹⁰ E.g. Popova, Maria, Politicized Justice in Emerging Democracies: A study of Courts in Russia and Ukraine (2012).Google Scholar

¹¹ E.g. Chemin, Mathieu, Do judiciaries matter for development? Evidence from India, 37 Journal of Comparative Economics 230 (2009); Stefan Voigt, Jerg Gutmann & Lars Feld, Economic growth and judicial independence, a dozen years on: Cross-country evidence using an updated Set of indicators, 38 European Journal of Political Economy 197 (2015); or J. Anthony Cookson, Economic Consequences of Judicial Institutions: Evidence from a Natural Experiment (2014), available at: https://extranet.sioe.org/uploads/isnie2014/cookson.pdf.Google Scholar

¹² See Garoupa, Nuno & Ginsburg, Tom, Guarding the Guardians: Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence in 57 The American Journal of Comparative Law 103 (2009) at 123; Daniel Smilov, EU Enlargement and the Constitutional Principle of Judicial Independence in Wojciech Sadurski, Adam Czarnota & Martin Krygier, Spreading Democracy and the Rule of Law? The Impact of EU Enlargement for the Rule of Law 313 (2006); or David Kosař, Beyond Judicial Councils: Forms, Rationales and Impact of Judicial Self-Governance in Europe (in this special issue).Google Scholar

¹³ See Smilov, supra note 12; Cristina E. Parau, The Drive for Judicial Supremacy, in Judicial Independence in Transition 619 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012); or David Kosař, Perils of Judicial Self-Government in Transitional Societies 121-135 (2016).Google Scholar

¹⁴ For an overview see Ann Power, Judicial Independence and the Democratic Process: Some Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights (International Bar Association Conference 2012). See also: ECtHR, 23 June 1981, Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium, no. 6878/75; 7238/75; ECtHR, 28 June 1984, Campbell and Fell v. The United Kingdom, no. 7819/77; 7878/77; ECtHR, 22 June 1989, Lanbgorger v. Sweden, no. 11179/84, ∗ 32.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe, Recommendation No. R (94) 12 on the Independence, Efficiency and the Role of Judges, particularly Principle 1, Art. 2, par. C; Council of Europe, European Charter on the Statute for Judges, particularly Art. 1.3.; International Association of Judges, The Universal Charter of the Judge, particularly Art. 9. For more on the effect of ‘soft law’ on EctHR case law affecting judicial reforms in Europe see David Kosař, Nudging Domestic Judicial Reforms from Strasbourg: How the European Court of Human Rights shapes domestic judicial design in 13 Utrecht L.R. 112 (2017).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Bobek, Michal & Kosař, David, Global Solutions, Local Damages: A Critical Study in Judicial Councils in Central and Eastern Europe in 15 German L.J. 1257 (2014), at 1262; Parau, supra note 13, at 646-647.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe, Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 on Judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities, Art. 47.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Parau E.g., supra note 13, at 621; or Franck Emmert, The Independence of Judges – A Concept Often Misuderstood in Central and Eastern Europe, 3 European Journal of Law Reform 405 (2001).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Not necessarily would a selector be ever willing to utilize such capacity. For more on ‘willingness’ and ‘capacity’ to pressure courts see Popova, supra note 10.Google Scholar

²⁰ For the discussion on factors that play in favor of judges in this context see Alan Paterson, Power and Judicial Appointment: Squaring the Impossible Circle in Gee & Rackley, supra note 1, particularly at 49 et seq. In terms of controlling access to a particular profession, judges are not that unique. See Keith M. MacDonald, The sociology of professions (1995).Google Scholar

²¹ For a somewhat similar analogy see Mary L. Volcansek, Appointing Judges the European Way, 34 Fordham Urb. L.J. (2007).Google Scholar

²² E.g. Ramseyer, Marc J. & Rasmusen, Eric B., Why Are Japanese Judges so Conservative in Politically Charged Cases?, 95 The American Political Science Review 331 (2001).Google Scholar

²³ On the bureaucratic nature of judicial careers in some judicial systems see for instance: Carlo Guarnieri & Patricia Pederzoli, The Power of Judges (2002).Google Scholar

²⁴ Paterson E.g., supra note 20.Google Scholar

²⁵ See Guarnieri & Pederzoli, supra note 23; or Graham Gee, The Persistent Politics of Judicial Selection: A Comparative Analysis, in Judicial Independence in Transition 121 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012).Google Scholar

²⁶ Garoupa, Nuno & Ginsburg, Tom, Hybrid Judicial Career Structures: Reputation versus Legal Tradition, 3 Journal of Legal Analysis 411 (2011).Google Scholar

²⁷ See for instance: Volcansek, supra note 21; or Guarnieri, supra note 5.Google Scholar

²⁸ See Guarnieri & Pederzoli, supra note 23, at 66-67; or Gee, supra note 25.Google Scholar

²⁹ By junior judges I mean, for the purposes of this analysis, positions found for instance in Czechia or Slovakia, which refer to a specific type of apprenticeship during which junior judges spend some time in a different division of the judicial system in order to become familiar with its inner workings. See for instance, Kosař, supra note 13, at 189, who refers to them as ‘judicial candidates', however it may be confusing to use this term in this context.Google Scholar

³⁰ Court officials with certain judicial powers in German speaking countries or countries influenced by the German legal culture. For instance, CEPEJ reports, supra note 7, use this term as well.Google Scholar

³¹ See for instance: Michal Bobek, The Fortress of Judicial Independence and the Mental Transition of the Central European Judiciaries, 14 European Public Law 99 (2008).Google Scholar

³² Gee, supra note 25, at 124.Google Scholar

³³ Merryman, John H., The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal System of Western Europe and Latin America 34 (Stanford University Press, 1990).Google Scholar

³⁴ E.g.: Garoupa & Ginsburg, supra note 26.Google Scholar

³⁵ Guarnieri & Pederzoli, supra note 23; and Gee, supra note 25.Google Scholar

³⁶ Ferejohn, John, Independent Judges, Dependent Judiciary: Explaining Judicial Independence, 72 Southern California L.R. 353 (1998).Google Scholar

³⁷ A similar point can be found in Bell, supra note 5, at 17.Google Scholar

³⁸ Garoupa & Ginsburg, supra note 26; or Nuno Garoupa & Tom Ginsburg, Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory (2015).Google Scholar

³⁹ Guarnieri, supra note 5, at 171. See also discussion throughout Part C.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See Smit, Van Zyl, supra note 1; or Jan van Zyl Smit, 'Opening up’ Commonwealth Judicial Appointments to Diversity? The Growing Role of Judicial Commissions, in Debating Judicial Appointments in an Age of Diversity 70 (Gee, Graham & Rackley, Erika eds., 2017). Also, the statement that 81% of Commonwealth countries have some kind of Commission playing a role in the selection of judges can be found in: Graham Gee & Erika Rackley, Introduction: Diversity and the JAC's First Decade, in Debating Judicial Appointments in an Age of Diversity 1 (Graham Gee & Erika Rackley eds., 2017).Google Scholar

⁴¹ See for instance: Denise Lu, Alicia Parlapiano & Karen Yourish, Kavanaugh Followed the Narrow, Elite Path of Supreme Court Justices in New York Times, 10 July 2018, available at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/07/10/us/politics/supreme-court-path-kavanaugh.html.Google Scholar

⁴² See Volcansek, , supra note 21. It needs to be noted that in her analysis Volcansek does not separate ordinary judiciaries from apex and/or constitutional courts.Google Scholar

⁴³ See for instance: CEPEJ, supra note 7, at 81-112.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See Giacomo Oberto, Recrutement et formation des magistrats en Europe. Etude comparative 13 (2003) as cited in Bell, supra note 5.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Garoupa & Ginsburg, supra note 12, at 119-120.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ See for instance the case of Ireland in Jennifer Carroll MacNeill, The Politics of Judicial Selection in Ireland (2016); or Patrick O'Brien, Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste: Politics, Personality and Judicial Self-Government in Ireland (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ E.g. Blisa, Adam, Tereza Papoušková & Marína Urbániková, Judicial Self-Government in Czechia: Europe's Black Sheep? (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ See the discussion in Part C.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ See particularly Part C.III.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ A similar analogy was previously used by Volcansek, supra note 21, at 364. Volcansek identified three stages of the process: a) certification, which ‘derives a person's status in the structure of political opportunity, his opportunity costs, and political socialization;’ b) selection, in which candidates and the selecting body interact; and c) role assignment, which gives legitimacy when a candidate formally assumes the office.Google Scholar

⁵¹ For instance, Germany offers a completely different model where the crucial moment separating those who can eventually become judges and those who cannot takes place at state exams at the end of law graduates’ university studies. See Fabian Wittreck, Judicial Self-Government in Germany: Resistance and the Roots of Counter-Resistance (in this special issue); Johannes Riedel, Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in Germany, in Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in Europe 69 (Giuseppe Di Federico ed., 2005); or Bell, supra note 5, at 108-173.Google Scholar

⁵² For instance, in France there are numerous ways in which one may enter the judiciary. See Roger Errera, The Recruitment, Training, Career and Accountability of Members of the Judiciary in France in Di Federico, supra note 4 at 49-50; Bell, supra note 5, at 52-53.Google Scholar

⁵³ Vauchez, Antoine, The Strange Non-Death of Statism: Tracing The Ever Protracted Rise of Self-Government in France (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Errera, supra note 52, at 51-52.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ To apply to the French judicial school, ENM, candidates need to have any 4-year university degree in any subject, not necessarily a law degree. See Errera, supra note 52, at 45.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Poblet, Maria & Casanovas, Pompeu, Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in Spain in Johannes Riedel, Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in Germany, in Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in Europe 193 (Giuseppe Di Federico ed., 2005).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Coman, Ramona & Dallara, Cristina, Judicial Independence in Romania, in Judicial Independence in Transition 835, 848 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012).Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Errera, supra note 52, at 48.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Poblet & Casanovas, supra note 56, at 193.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Pérez, Aida Torres, Judicial self-government and judicial independence: the political capture of the General Council of the Judiciary in Spain (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁶¹ Errera, supra note 52, at 52.Google Scholar

⁶² See Selejan-Gutan, Bianca, Romania: Perils of a ‘Perfect Euro-Model’ of Judicial Council (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁶³ Poblet & Casanovas, supra note 56, at 194.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Errera, supra note 52, at 45.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Poblet & Casanovas, supra note 56, at 194.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Torres-Pérez, , supra note 60.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Errera, supra note 52, at 53.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Errera, supra note 52, at 54, Table 2-4.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Coman & Dallara, supra note 57, at 850.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Torres-Pérez, , supra note 60.Google Scholar

⁷¹ As of 2014, the share of women in the judiciary in Romania was at 74%, in France 62% and in Spain 52%. See CEPEJ, supra note 7.Google Scholar

⁷² E.g. Duarte, Madlena, Paula Fernando, Conceiçãcao Gomes & Ana Oliveira, The Feminization of the Judiciary in Portugal: Dilemmas and Paradoxes, 10 Utrecht Law Review 29 (2014).Google Scholar

⁷³ For France see Doris Marie Provine & Antoine Garapon, The Selection of Judges in France: Searching for a New Legitimacy, in Malleson & Russell, supra note 5. For Spain see for instance: Bell, supra note 5, at 190, where candidates from less prosperous regions with fewer professional opportunities were also particularly over-represented.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Bell, supra note 5, at 53.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ In France, entering the judiciary right after university remains the most common path, however there have been efforts to promote alternative paths. See Antoine Garapon & Harold Epineuse, Judicial Independence in France, in Judicial Independence in Transition 273, 281 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012).Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Poblet & Casanovas, supra note 56, at 195.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Errera, supra note 52, at 47-48.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ For the purpose of participation in the judicial selection procedure, judicial, advocate's, prosecutor's or notary exam all count as equal.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ See Anna Śledzińska-Simon, The Rise and Fall of Judicial Self-Governement in Poland: On Judicial Reform Reversing Transition (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Langbroek, Philip M., Recruitment, Professional Evaluation and Career of Judges and Prosecutors in the Netherlands in Di Federico, supra note 5, at 164.Google Scholar

⁸¹ See Mak, Elaine, Judicial Self-Government in the Netherlands: Demarcating Autonomy (in this special issue).Google Scholar

⁸² De Lange, Roel, Judicial Independence in the Netherlands, in Judicial Independence in Transition 231, 243 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012).Google Scholar

⁸³ Langbroek, supra note 80, at 168.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Id. at 168.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Spáč, Samuel, By the Judges, For the Judges: The study of Judicial Selection in Slovakia (Dissertation Thesis, Comenius University, 2017).Google Scholar

⁸⁶ There are eight regional courts in Slovakia. In each of the regions there are five to eight district courts.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ For more detailed description of all phases see Spáč, supra note 85, at 92-94.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ For more see Samuel Spáč, Kariérny postup na vyššie súdy: pod kontrolou predsedov súdov, in Nedotknutelní? Politika sudcovských kariér na Slovensku v rokoch 1993-2015 121 (Láštic, Erik & Spáč, Samuel eds., 2017); Adam Bodnar & Lukasz Bojarski, Judicial Independence in Poland, in Judicial Independence in Transition 667, 686 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012).Google Scholar

⁸⁹ For more see Erik Láštic and Samuel Spáč, Slovakia /Slovaquie in 26 European Review of Public Law 1201 (2014); or Samuel Spáč, Katarína Śipulová & Marína Urbániková, Capturing the Judiciary from Inside: The Story of Judicial Self-Government in Slovakia (in this special issue); and Bodnar & Bojarski, supra note 88, at 679-680.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ For more see Spáč, supra note 85, at 94.Google Scholar

⁹¹ For more see Bodnar & Bojarski, supra note 88, at 687, 690-693; Śledzińska-Simon, supra note 79.Google Scholar

⁹² See Sledzinska-Simon, , supra note 79.Google Scholar

⁹³ See Sledzinska-Simon, , supra note 79.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Spáč, supra note 85.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ For composition see MacNeill, supra note 46.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ When refering only to the Judicial Appointments Commission responsible for appointments in England and Wales, I purposefuly omit the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission (NIJAC) and the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland (JABS) that fulfill the same task in other parts of the UK. Also, it needs to be noted that the JAC is responsible only for appointments to the Court of Appeal and High Court, while the appointments to the UK Supreme Court happen in a different regime. See van Zyl Smit, supra note 1, at 206-207.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ MacNeill, supra note 46, at 88.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Although the process was perceived as de-politicized and merit-based, political considerations seemed to matter. See Chris Hanretty, The Appointment of Judges By Ministers: Political Preferment in England, 1880-2005 in 3 Journal of Law and Courts 305 (2015).Google Scholar

⁹⁹ See Smit, van Zyl, supra note 1, at 14.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ For more on these practices see van Zyl Smit, supra note 1, at 13.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ For more information see https://aji.ie/the-judiciary/appointment-to-judicial-office/.Google Scholar

¹⁰² For more information see https://www.judicialappointments.gov.uk/eligibility-legally-qualified-candidates.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ MacNeill, supra note 46, at 89, 127–128.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ MacNeill, supra note 46, at 98.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ See O'Brien, supra note 46.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ For more information about the process see https://www.judicialappointments.gov.uk/overview-selection-process.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ For more information see https://www.judicialappointments.gov.uk/statutory-consultation.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ For more see https://www.judicialappointments.gov.uk/equal-merit-provision.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ O'Brien, supra note 46.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ MacNeill, supra note 46, at 151.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ CEPEJ, supra note 7, at 101.Google Scholar

¹¹² See https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/judicial-diversity-statistics-2018-l.pdf.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Malleson, supra note 7, at 281.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Dallara, Cristina, Judicial Reforms in Transition: Legacies of the past and dominant political actors in post-communist countries, 1 IRSIG-CNR Working Paper 10 (2007).Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ For the purpose of consideration for a judicial position, candidates can have passed exams authorizing them to work in different legal professions, such as advocates, notaries or executors.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ See Avbelj, Matej, Contextual Analysis of Judicial Governance in Slovenia (in this special issue).Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Blisa, Papoušková & Urbániková, , supra note 47.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Dallara, Cristina, Smoother Judicial Reforms in Slovenia and Croatia: Does the Legacy of the Past Matter?, in Democracy and Judicial Reforms in South-East Europe: Between the EU and the Legacies of the Past 31, 39 (Cristina Dallara ed., 2014).Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Dallara, supra note 118, at 38-39; Avbelj, supra note 116.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ For more on ‘junior judges’ and their chances to become judges in the Czech system see Kosař, supra note 13, at 189.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Hanretty E.g., supra note 98; Stephen Choi & Mitu Gulati, A Tournament of Judges? In 92 California L.R. 299 (2004); Jordi Blanes I. Vidal & Clare Leaver, Are Tenured Judges Insulated from Political Pressure? In 95 Journal of Public Economics 570 (2011); or Martin R. Schneider, Judicial Career Incentives and Court Performance: An Empirical Study of the German Labour Courts, 20 European Journal of Law and Economics 127 (2005).Google Scholar

¹²² Alter, Karen J., Agents or Trustees? International Courts in their Political Context in 14 European Journal of International Relations 33, 42 (2008).Google Scholar

¹²³ Hanretty E.g., supra note 98; Jeffrey A. Segal & Harold J. Spaeth, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited (2002).Google Scholar

¹²⁴ See particularly ‘government control regime’ in Rachel E. Bowen, Judicial Autonomy in Central America: A Typological Approach in 66 Political Research Quarterly 831 (2013). For current developments in Central Europe see Adam Bodnar, Europe can save Poland from darkness in Politico, 9 April 2018, available at: https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-judiciary-rule-of-law-europe-must-intervene/; David Kosař & Katarína Śipulová, The Strasbourg Court Meets Abusive Constitutionalism: Baka v. Hungary and the Rule of Law in 10 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 83 (2018); or Bojan Bugaric & Tom Ginsburg, The Assault on Postcommunist Courts in 27 Journal of Democracy 69 (2016). For other parts of world see Raul A. Sanchez-Urribarri, The Politicization of Latin American Judiciary via Informal Connections, in Legitimacy, Development and Change: Law and Modernization Reconsidered 307 (David K. Linnan, ed., 2012); Fombad, supra note 2; Alexander Stroh, Consequences of Appointment Policies for Court Legitimacy in Benin: A Network Analysis Approach, 281 GIGA Working Paper (2016); or Voeten, supra note 3.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Malleson E.g., supra note 1; Jeffrey D. Jackson, Beyond Quality: First Principles in Judicial Selection and their Application to a Commission-Based Selection System in 34 Fordham Urban L.J. 125 (2007).Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Spáč, Śipulová & Urbániková, , supra note 89.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ See Benvenuti, Simone & Paris, David, Judicial Self-Government in Italy: Merits, Limits and the Reality of an Export Model (in this special issue); Başak Çalı & Betül Dürmuş, Judicial Self-Government as Experimental Constitutional Politics: The Case of Turkey (in this special issue).Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Kosař, , supra note 12.Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Such relationships can be framed within Principal-Agent theory. See Voeten, supra note 3. Although for the study of judges some authors recommend rather the idea of ‘trustees’ as they are entrusted with power and have freedom to act autonomously on behalf of the principal. See Alter, supra note 122, at 38-44.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ E.g. Ramseyer, J. Mark & Rasmusen, Eric B., Judicial Independence in a Civil Law Regime: The Evidence from Japan in 13 The Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 259 (1997); Ramseyer & Rasmusen, supra note 22; David M. O'Brien & Yasuo Ohkoshi, Stifling Judicial Independence from Within:, in Judicial Independence in the Age of Democracy 37 (Russell, Peter H. & O'Brien, David M. eds., 2001); Bobek & Kosař, supra note 16; Kosař, supra note 13; Bogdan lancu, Perils of Sloganised Constitutional Concepts. Notably that of ‘Judicial Independence', 13 European Constitutional L.R. 582 (2017); Coman & Dallara, supra note 57; Lukasz Bojarski & Werner Stemker Köster, The Slovak judiciary: its current state and challenges (Open Society Foundation 2012); Maria Popova, Be Careful What You Wish For: A Cautionary Tale of Post-Communist Judicial Empowerment, 18 Demokratizatsiya 56 (2010); Maria Popova, Why Doesn't the Bulgarian Judiciary Prosecute Corruption?, 59 Problems of Post-Communism 35 (2012); Lydia F. Müller, Judicial Administration in Eastern Countries, in Judicial Independence in Transition 937 (Anja Seibert-Fohr ed., 2012).Google Scholar

¹³¹ Several authors studied judicial selection using statistical analyses, e.g.: Vidal & Leaver, supra note 121; Hanretty, supra note 98; Spáč, supra note 85. Another possibility is employing network analytcal approach, for an overview see Björn Dressel, Raul Sanchez-Urribarri & Alexander Stroh, The Informal Dimension of Judicial Politics, 13 Annual Review of Law and Social Science 413 (2017).Google Scholar

¹³² Posner, Richard A., What Do Judges and Justices Maximize? (The Same Thing Everybody Else Does), 3 Supreme Court Economic Review 1, 31-39(1993).Google Scholar

¹³² Duarte E.g. et al., supra note 72; or Matej Uhlík & Samuel Spáč, Príčiny a dôsledky nadreprezentácie žien v slovenskom súdnictve, in Nedotknutelní? Politika sudcovských kariér na Slovensku v rokoch 1993-2015 (Láštic, Erik & Spáč, Samuel eds., 2017).Google Scholar

¹³⁴ E.g. Beers, Daniel J., Understanding Corruption in the Post-Communist Courts: Attitudinal Data from Romania and Czech Republic (11^th Annual International Researchers Conference “Post-Communist Corruption: Causes, Manifestations, Consequences 2012).Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Alemanno, Alberto, How Transparent is Transparent Enough? Balancing Access to Information Against Privacy in European Judicial Selection, in Selecting Europe's Judges: A Critical Review of the Appointment Procedures to the European Courts 202 (Michal Bobek ed., 2015).Google Scholar

¹³⁶ See contributions on different jurisdictions in this issue, particularly Germany. Although it is rarely considered an example of strong judicial self-governance, even there judges play a substantive role in the recruitment of their colleagues: see Wittreck, supra note 51.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ MacNeill, supra note 46, at 38-47, 88.Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Spáč, , supra note 85.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ E.g. Smit, Van Zyl, supra note 1.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Selejan-Gutan E.g., supra note 62; or Parau, supra note 13.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Dimino, supra note 6, at 819. For different approaches to the quality of judges see also: Jason E. Whitehead, Judging the Judges: Values and the Rule of Law (2014).Google Scholar

¹⁴² Provine & Garapon, supra note 73.Google Scholar

¹⁴³ De Lange, , supra note 82, at 243.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ Malleson E.g., supra note 1; or Malleson, supra note 7.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ Spáč, , supra note 85.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Poblet & Casanovas, supra note 56, at 161.Google Scholar