Here is the translation:
1. Subject of Dispute:
Challenging the decision of the High Qualification Commission of Judges regarding the refusal to recommend PERSON_1 for a judge position due to doubts about her integrity.
2. Main Court Arguments:
The court supported the HQCJ decision, believing there are substantiated doubts about the candidate’s integrity due to:
– Incomplete property declaration (did not indicate the value of apartments and vehicles)
– Simultaneous oath-taking as a civil servant and an attorney
– Improper completion of the candidate’s questionnaire
– Insufficient understanding of judicial ethical norms during the interview
3. Court Decision:
PERSON_1’s appeal was left unsatisfied, the HQCJ decision was recognized as lawful.
Key Conclusion: The Commission lawfully exercised its right to assess the candidate’s integrity within the provided discretion.
