A/HRC/38/38 governance of the judiciary is “a best practice to strengthen its independence”, and urged those States that do not have such bodies “to create them and endow them with the guarantees that enable them to perform each of their assigned functions independently”, in the manner prescribed by international law standards (para. 248). IV. Judicial councils: general principles A. Definition 27. There is no generally agreed definition of a judicial council. In its recommendation on judicial independence adopted in 2010, the Committee of Ministers defines “councils for the judiciary” as “independent bodies … that seek to safeguard the independence of the judiciary and of individual judges and thereby to promote the efficient functioning of the judicial system” (para. 26). The Kyiv Recommendations on Judicial Independence in Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia define “judicial councils” as “bodies entrusted with specific tasks of judicial administration and independent competences in order to guarantee judicial independence” (para. 2). Other legal instruments do not provide a definition of what constitutes a judicial council, and simply focus on the necessary requirements that such institutions must possess, namely independence from the executive and legislative branches of power and a large proportion of its membership made up of members of the judiciary. 28. The diversity of legal systems is reflected in the choice made by the legislator on the names of the authorities entrusted with the protection of judicial independence at the national level. In civil law countries, these bodies are generally referred to as a “judicial council”, 12 “council for the judiciary”, 13 “supreme/superior judicial council” 14 or “high council of the judiciary”.15 In common law countries, they are generally referred to as a “judicial services commission”. However, other terms are used, such as “judicial and legal service commission”, 16 “council of administrative affairs of the judiciary”, 17 “general council of the judiciary”18 and “judicial and bar council”.19 In some cases, the name of the body depends on the specific functions entrusted to it (e.g. judicial appointment council, commission or board, 20 “judges’ examination committee”, 21 “judges proposals board”, 22 “judges personnel committee”23 and “judicial inquiry commission”.24) 29. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur uses the term “judicial council” to refer to the various independent and autonomous bodies established at the national level to guarantee the independence of individual judges and the judiciary as a whole. 30. In addition to their responsibilities for safeguarding the independence of judges, some judicial councils are also responsible for public prosecutors.25 The present report only focuses on the role and functions of judicial councils as regards judges. Questions concerning the status of prosecutors, including their appointment, promotion, capacitybuilding and discipline, as well as the organization and functioning of national prosecutorial councils or equivalent independent bodies, are dealt with in a previous report specifically 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Costa Rica, Hungary, Jordan, Nepal and Slovakia. Bolivia (Plurinational State of), El Salvador and Latvia. Algeria, Andorra, Greece and Togo. Belgium, Georgia, Italy and Serbia. Mauritius. Oman. Mongolia. Philippines. Denmark, Ireland, Japan, Malta and Norway. Estonia and Lithuania. Sweden. Republic of Korea. Liberia. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Italy and Turkey. 7