a kaleidoscope of people pacity to qualify for the highest judicial office within the member states. Based on their individual career paths, as at the ECtHR, members of theCJEUcan be grouped into the same four categories – (former) career judges, academics, attorneys, and public officials – and again there is no strict division, because individual judges have overlapping legal experience.22 At the CJEU, decision-making takes place in a chamber of 3 judges, a chamber of 5 judges (the commonest), the Grand Chamber of 13 judges, and the Full Court in exceptionally important cases.23 The benches are composed on a rotating basis designed to balance senior and junior experience on the bench, and the composition is neutral—the bench is ‘nationality blind’.24 Unlike the ECHR, the CJEU‘national judges’ are not mandatory on the bench when the member state is concerned.25 Advocates general assist solving the legal question put to the bench by delivering their legal opinion prior to the bench’s deliberation, though the bench is not bound by it. Judges and advocates general staff their own offices (cabinets) with assistants and clerks. Again, unlike the ECtHR they can establish long-term working relationships with their employees. The working language of the CJEUis French and simultaneous interpretation during deliberations is not provided, which has a significant impact on the court’s daily work. The format of judgement is modelled on the French legal system, and a core notion at the CJEUis the secrecy of deliberation (Statute of Court Art. 35). The Court speaks as with one voice. Dissent or agreement is not evident from the judgements. The jurisdiction of the CJEUcovers the 27 member states of the European Union (EU). With 842 new cases and an output of 760 cases in 2017, the CJEUis smaller than the ECtHR, but the legal strength of its reviews the prospective candidates’ suitability, for a term of six years, which is renewable. They are chosen from among individuals whose independence is beyond doubt, who possess the necessary qualifications in their respective countries, who have held the highest judicial offices, or who are of recognized competence. 22 See Arold Lorenz et al. 2013, 26. 23 TFEU Art. 251; Statute of the Court (CJEU) Art. 16. 24 See Arold Lorenz et al. 2013, 112. 25 Ibid. 20. 305
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=