Why should the president appoint judges?

We live in a time when there are things going on that simply cannot be understood by the Constitution (or our basic laws). What I do not understand about this whole issue is its logic.

soudcovské kladivo a váhy

But to be a person who determines the guilt and punishment of others in our society, one should first say what must be accomplished. It must be a graduate of one of the law schools of the Czech Republic (Pilsen, Prague, Brno, or Olomouc). It must also be a citizen of the Czech Republic, of good character, of full legal capacity, and of a certain moral experience that guarantees conscientious and fair judgment. Finally, they must be at least 30 years of age and must consent to their appointment.

The storyline begins with a judge candidate first taking the position of “assistant judge,” testing many areas of the law and understanding how it works. Once he reaches the age of 30, he is given the opportunity to apply for a judge\’s position, if one is available. From among the candidates, a judge is eventually chosen by the presiding judge of that court, who then proposes his or her appointment to the president. Up to this stage, everything is logical and understandable.
budova soudu

However, the turning point will now come in the form of the president\’s decision to appoint or not appoint a certain candidate to a certain judgeship. The first thing that is somewhat concerning at this stage is the fact that there is no deadline at all for “pressing” the President to make a decision. I also do not like the fact that the proper influence over the lives of future judges is left in the hands of the president, who is acting as a layman, not as an expert.

Therefore, in my best belief, there should at least be a discussion about the appropriateness of this procedure in today\’s society, which could, for example, serve as a guideline to trigger some successive changes that could move our country forward