Training on the peculiarities of using psychologist’s opinion during an interview with a candidate for the judicial position was held
On January 11, 2019 with the support of the EU Pravo-Justice Project the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine hosted the training for the members of the Commission on the peculiarities of using psychologist’s opinion during the interview with a judge/judicial candidate in the framework of the qualification evaluation.
Participants got practical advice on using report on the results of psychological testing during interviews and on how to assess such a person on the basis of this report.
It should be noted that an opinion on the results of testing of personal moral and psychological qualities and general abilities contains characteristics of personal competence of a judge/judicial candidate. In particular, it is about personal strengths and weaknesses, as well as possible risks.
The training was conducted by representatives of the company which provided psychological testing of judges and candidates for the position of a judge in the framework of competitive tests and evaluation for the compliance with the position held.
At the end of the event, the Commission Members emphasised the important role of the training given that currently the HQCJ is preparing for interviews with candidates for the positions of judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court, Appeal Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court as well as cassation courts within the Supreme Court. They thanked the EU Pravo-Justice Project for the assistance provided to the Commission in assessing moral and psychological qualities and general abilities of judges/judicial candidates.
Reference:
The EU Pravo-Justice Project implemented with the financial support of the European Union is aimed at consolidating pan-European reforms in the field of justice. The Project involves experts from various EU Member States and will continue till the end of year 2020. The main Project’s activities are, inter alia, assisting Ukrainian authorities in the judiciary reset and selection of new Supreme Court justices, the establishment of the Judicial Reform Council, restructuring the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, reforming registers and e-justice, facilitating probation service etc.
