Algeria judiciary’s uncertain future
Recommendation
Corruption risk if recommendation is not complied with
Country reports where this issue is explored in detail
● Participation of civil society
Debates on unfair and corrupt practices are stifled and corruption is not uncovered, so that the corrupt can act in the knowledge that they will not be scrutinised.
Cambodia, Egypt, Mongolia, Pakistan, Palestine, Panama, Philippines, Romania, Zimbabwe
actors (NGOs, court users, media and academics) to monitor judicial procedures, in particular appointments and dismissals, and decisions in order to detect corrupt and unfair practices in the judiciary. Civil society should be free to operate unimpeded in an environment open to debate and criticism, and contempt of court and defamation rules should not be abused to inhibit debate.
A poorly informed civil society may create pressure on judges so that independent and impartial judgement is hindered, rather than promoted.
Algeria’s judiciary: from bad beginnings to an uncertain future
Legal system: Common law, inquisitorial (with elements of Islamic law), prosecution part of judiciary Judges per 100,000 population: 3.01 Judge’s salary at start of career: US $6352 Supreme Court judge’s salary: US $1,130–1,4103 GNI per capita: US $2,7304 5 Annual budget of judiciary: US $310 million Total annual budget: US $22.1 billion6 Percentage of annual budget: 1.4 Are all court decisions open to appeal up to the highest level? Yes Institution in charge of disciplinary and administrative oversight: Not independent Are all rulings publicised? Yes, but with difficulty due to bureaucracy Code of conduct for judges: Yes 1 Syndicat des Magistrats (2006) 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 World Bank Development Indicators (2005) 5 Loi de finances (2007) 6 Ibid.
Under one-party rule since independence in 1962, Algeria attached little importance to the role of the judiciary in society. Judges were on a par with other civil servants until the adoption
of a series of constitutional revisions in 1989, which marked the beginning of a brief democratic interlude. A 1969 law defined the judiciary as a function ‘at the service of the socialist revolution’.
171