Recently, the Supreme Judicial Council, responsible for appointing judges, appointed nine District Court Judges. With the introduction of the Supreme Constitutional Court, for the first time, decisions of the Supreme Judicial Council can now be contested before the Supreme Constitutional Court.

Last Wednesday, the Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus addressed a preliminary yet crucial issue concerning the locus standi of two respondents who opposed the decision of the Supreme Judicial Council. The central question was whether the respondents had a legitimate interest in challenging the appointment of the nine judges, given that nine additional vacancies remained unfilled by the Supreme Judicial Council.

The Supreme Constitutional Court ruled that one cannot challenge a decision with the intention of harming third parties who have benefited from it without oneself benefiting from the annulment of the decision. The Court articulated the following principles:

“An Objector may raise grounds for annulment which are in his favour and only by reflection affect the interests of successful candidates. That is to say, no one may put forward grounds for annulment which would have the effect (if they succeed) to harm the interests of the successful candidates, without, however, benefiting themselves. Such grounds for annulment are devoid of purpose.”

The primary issue in this unprecedented proceeding -whether the decision to reject the respondents' appointment should be annulled- remains to be decided.

You can find the judgment here.