• The fundamental logic of court management is changing. Instead of dependence on the executive branch and “hand-picked” personnel decisions, there will be an autonomous body of judicial self-governance, which by law is responsible for the selection, promotion, evaluation, and disciplinary accountability of judges.

• For citizens, this means greater trust and predictability: decisions regarding judges are subject to review, and the quality of justice is maintained through ongoing assessment and training. The Council will also have its own budget and procedures, making the system resilient to political changes. In other words, instead of managed courts, there will be an independent, professional system accountable to every Belarusian.

• Members of the Council will be chosen by the professional community, not officials. Half of the Council will be composed of judges elected by their judicial body, while the other half will come from legal education, the bar, and human rights organizations. This eliminates “appointments on demand” and ensures that decisions are made by those directly responsible for the quality of justice.

• The Council will have twelve members with a five-year term, ensuring stability without dependence on political changes. During the initial launch of the model, one-third of the Council will include international experts. They are selected by the Sojm from proposed candidates to strengthen trust in the new body and bring international experience to Belarusian practice.

• Instead of presidential appointments, judges will be appointed by the National Council of Justice. The Council will also oversee their career advancement. In other words, the Council will manage a judge’s career from initial appointment to promotion.

• Judicial appointments will be indefinite, so judges will no longer depend on someone’s decision to “renew or not renew” a contract. Termination of powers will only be possible for clearly defined reasons and with the right to appeal. The decision will be made by the Council itself. As a result, a professional body will be responsible for a judge’s career from appointment to possible departure.

• Judges will become less dependent on officials, since their appointment, transfer, promotion, and disciplinary accountability are transferred to an independent Council. This gives judges the support to make decisions according to the law, not someone’s will. For citizens, this means a greater chance of impartial consideration of cases and clear rules in the courtroom.

• There will also be a transparent way to file complaints about a judge’s conduct. Complaints can be submitted in writing or online, reviewed by a disciplinary inspector, and decided collegially by the Council. Hearings on complaints will be broadcast, decisions will be reasoned and published, and dissenting opinions of Council members will also be made public. Importantly, Council decisions can be appealed in court. This process is transparent, verifiable, and not subject to behind-the-scenes arrangements.

• The Council will also oversee the selection and training of judges, their regular evaluation, and protection from interference. Even for the detention or arrest of a judge, the Council’s consent will be required. This will make pressure on judges risky and pointless, improving the quality of justice across the country.

• An organic law is a law that translates constitutional norms into clear, everyday rules. The Constitution sets the framework, and the organic law gives it concrete content.

• The Draft Constitution specifies that the Sojm adopts three types of laws: constitutional, organic, and ordinary, each with its own threshold for adoption.

• An ordinary law is passed by a simple majority of those participating in the vote, but at least one-third of the constitutional composition of parliament.

• An organic law requires a majority of the full constitutional composition of the Sojm, making it harder to pass but easier to protect from situational changes.

• A constitutional law has the highest barrier: it is approved in the third reading by three-fifths of the constitutional composition, and amendments to the main sections additionally require a referendum.

• Essentially, the deeper a law interferes with the structure of power, the broader the consensus required for its adoption. This ensures the predictability and stability of the rules that affect every Belarusian.

You can discuss the draft and propose amendments on several open platforms:

• on the website https://prastora.info

• in the SVAE mobile app (in the “Belarus Constitution Project” community)

• and on the Try Slany platform http://tryslany.com

On each platform, you can leave a comment on a specific article or provide general feedback — anonymously or under your name. All platforms protect personal data. Proposals collected from these resources are regularly gathered and forwarded to the Working Group for consideration.