The Constitutional Court gave a partially negative opinion on the Government's draft amendment to the Constitution regarding the appointment of judges, as well as the composition of the Superior Council of Magistracy. According to constitutional judges, the draft does not meet the conditions for revision and cannot be submitted to Parliament for consideration.

The decision of the Court is irrevocable. According to the draft amendment to the Constitution, the judges of all courts were to be appointed by the head of state, at the proposal of the Superior Council of Magistracy.

At the same time, the president could have rejected the candidacy proposed by the SCM only once. In the opinion of the magistrates of the Constitutional Court, the authors of the document did not provide a mechanism by which they would have avoided the constitutional deadlock, if the president had repeatedly rejected the SCM proposal.

Instead, the Court welcomed the provision that judges would have only functional immunity, which means that they cannot be punished for their legal opinion or for the conclusion reached in the decision-making process.

The draft also stipulates that half of the 12 members of the SCM be appointed by the General Assembly of Judges, and the other six be elected in competition. The government has also proposed that the term of office of the SCM be six years.