A/HRC/44/47/Add.1 Corruption.4 These laws entrust wide powers to prosecution authorities that go far beyond the supervisory powers mentioned in the Constitution. III. Positive developments 16. The declaration of independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 did not translate in the dismantlement of the authoritarian and centralized structure that Uzbekistan had inherited from that country. As the judiciary remained under the control of the executive power, it was unable to fulfil its role as guardian of the rule of law and of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people. The Prosecution’s Office (Prokuratura) retained the responsibility of supervising the observance of the law by all government ministries and institutions subordinate to them. In criminal proceedings, the role of judges was limited to rubber-stamping the requests made by the prosecutor in the indictment. The capacity of defence counsels to provide effective legal assistance to their clients was extremely limited, especially in the field of criminal law. 17. Today, this situation is gradually changing. Under the leadership of President Mirziyoyev, Uzbekistan has developed a comprehensive agenda of reforms to modernize State institutions and policies. The reform of the justice system, which is currently under way, is a key component of this agenda. Its main objectives are to protect the independence of the judiciary and to strengthen access to justice. 18. Some of the measures that have been adopted to strengthen the independence of the judiciary and the free exercise of the legal profession since President Mirziyoyev took office include: (a) The establishment of the Supreme Judicial Council as a constitutional body with a broad mandate to insulate the judiciary and judicial career processes from external political pressure; (b) The reorganization of the court system, which includes the transfer of the functions of the High Economic Court to the Supreme Court, the establishment of a new administrative justice system and the transfer of a number of administrative and technical functions relating to the court administration from the Ministry of Justice to the new Department for Supporting Court Activities, established within the Supreme Court; (c) The gradual increase in the acquittal rate in criminal proceedings as an indicator of the strengthening of the autonomy of judges vis-à-vis prosecutors; (d) offices; (e) New procedures for the selection and appointment of candidates to judicial Measures to strengthen the security of tenure for judges; (f) The enactment of a number of measures, including the establishment of the Higher Judicial School under the Supreme Judicial Council, with the aim of strengthening the initial and continuous training of judges; (g) The regular publication of court decisions on the website of the Supreme Court, and the gradual establishment of electronic procedures aimed at increasing transparency and facilitating access to justice; (h) A number of key reforms in the area of anti-corruption policies, including the adoption of a law on anti-corruption and the creation of mechanisms for the implementation of such measures. 19. Such measures should be regarded as initial steps towards the establishment of a truly independent and impartial justice system. Much more needs to be done to ensure that the judiciary is truly independent from other branches of the State, and that judges, prosecutors and lawyers are free to carry out their professional activities without any undue interference or pressure. 4 Law No. ZRU-419 of 3 January 2017. 5