EN
The article deals with the prerogatives of the President of Republic to appoint judges on the motion of the National Council of the Judiciary. Its aim is to give arguments in favor of the thesis that neither Article 179 nor Article 144, para. 3, subpara. 17 of the Constitution cannot provide a basis for the President’s decision refusing to appoint the judge. In a democratic state ruled by law and implementing the principle of legality in the exercise of powers of public authorities, one cannot unquestioningly accept the thesis that the prerogative is a personal privilege of the President, which may be enjoyed irrespective of the constitutional regulation of rights and without a specifi c legal procedure. Article 179 in conjunction with Article 144 para. 3, subpara. 17 of the Constitution provides a basis for the reconstruction of two norms: a competence norm and a norm requiring President to make use of the powers granted to the him. This provision cannot provide a basis for the president’s decision refusing to appoint the judge. The National Council of the Judiciary, due to its constitutional authority to safeguard the independence of courts and judges, is competent to carry out a detailed and substantive evaluation of the candidate for the position of judge. However, in view of the limitations of Article 10 in conjunction with Article 173 of the Constitution, the President may apply to the National Council of the Judiciary to reconsider the case.