At the opening of the 2026 Judicial Year, the president of the Supreme Court of Justice, Orlando Aguirre, was categorical in pointing out that “judicial independence is non-negotiable” and? “Costa Rica does not need a subjugated Judiciary”. You are right. But to protect that independence, the Judiciary must review and strengthen its structures, promote internal reforms and correct weaknesses which, if not addressed, can make you vulnerable precisely to the risks you seek to avoid.
One of the challenges is in the election system for the 22 magistrates that make up the Plenary Courtwho, by mandate of article 158 of the Political Constitution, are appointed by the Legislative Assembly by a qualified majority of 38 of the 57 deputies. Since its origin, It is a political decision. It is not about eliminating that procedure, but about strengthen it with technical and objective criteria that limit the discretion of legislators when voting by affinities.
The issue becomes relevant because the congressmen who will take office on May 1 They must decide the continuity or replacement of 13 magistrates, that is to say, 60% of the Supreme Court of Justicea decision that will set the course of the Judiciary and, with it, the solidity of democratic counterweights in the coming years.
Precisely, a report presented on March 24 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) warns of the abyss between the procedures for selecting judges and magistrates. In the case of judges, the Judicial Career Law requires them to be appointed through open competitive examinations, that is, based on merit, equality of conditions and objective evaluation of knowledge, abilities and aptitudes. The magistratesinstead, They are evaluated by deputies of the Congressional Appointments Commissionwhich submits a shortlist to the plenary session.
More critical is the State of Justice Report 2025, presented in June, stating that the appointment process remains a challenge for judicial independencebecause “the Legislative Assembly does not make significant progress in guaranteeing the suitability of magistrates; there were even setbacks in the methodology of the Appointments Commission.”
He also determined that “political intervention – particularly direct by a government – in the judicial appointment process can lead to the perception, or even the reality, that judicial decisions are unduly influenced by political intereststhus compromising the impartiality and credibility of the Judiciary.”
Added to this is the worrying citizen perception that the Executive Branch should have the power to appoint judges and magistratesas evidenced by a survey by the Center for Research and Political Studies (CIEP) in 2024. 54% of the people consulted said they agreed with the Executive exercising that power, while 39.9% expressed some degree of disagreement, data that reveals a limited understanding of the importance of judicial independence and its implications.
Although the oecd positively values the judicial system –with 74% compliance in regulatory criteria and 60% in practical integrity criteria, above the organization’s averages–, indicates that One of the main areas for improvement is in the way in which magistrates are chosen.
It is then a question of subjecting the procedure to rigorous rules that guide it to merit. This requires incorporating robust technical evaluations, stricter scoring systems similar to those of judges, public interviews and ethical and professional suitability criteria that reduce discretion and ensure that only the best arrive.
To achieve this, the Appointments Commission should rely on recruitment experts to help refine its methods and structure truly technical processes, based on proven probity, independence from parties and pressure groups and absence of political debts. Added to this is raising the standards of experience and professional maturity, since Today the only requirement is to be over 35 years old.
Although he had offered to review the system after the Celso Gamboa scandal, which led to his dismissal in 2018, due to his “undue interest” in favoring a close friend linked to the “cementazo”the decisions follow earrings. Before others, The first ones who should take the lead in proposing adjustments are the magistrates themselves..
They must act because There are not only strong attacks from political power, but because citizen confidence in the Judiciary continues to be fragile, fluctuating and, in many cases, overcome by skepticism, according to the reading of the State of Justice. In this context, the way in which judges are chosen is a strategic decision. If processes are corrected, standards are raised, and the suitability of those at the top of the judiciary is guaranteed, the country can begin to rebuild that lost trust.
The judicial independence, without a doubt, is non-negotiable. But its defense requires ensuring, from within, that those who embody it live up to the mandate that the Constitution confers on them.
