With an entrance exam, which involve a panel of judges and university professor, and the N best grades get the available positions.
To limit corruption, at leas where I am, these exam are anomyzed (even one you take at university are), so the people doing the grading doesn’t know who they grade, and only afterwards another person checks the name and the grade
Passing an exam sounds good to me, but the paranoid part of me thinks that requirement could be manipulated and corrupted. Even so, that would only give you a pool to select from. It doesnt decide who gets which position. As far as having peer selection, that would be very vulnerable to turning into a good ole boy network.
What are the other options?
Edit: why would someone down vote a question? It’s not like it’s even a leading question.
I’ll try to answer myself. Options for how a judge is put in their position:
Elected or appointed. Are there any other options?
If they are appointed then you better really trust whoever does the appointing because you will have no recourse if they are a bad fit.
With an entrance exam, which involve a panel of judges and university professor, and the N best grades get the available positions. To limit corruption, at leas where I am, these exam are anomyzed (even one you take at university are), so the people doing the grading doesn’t know who they grade, and only afterwards another person checks the name and the grade
Peer selected is also a possibility, as well as passing a law exam, like the bar but for judges.
Passing an exam sounds good to me, but the paranoid part of me thinks that requirement could be manipulated and corrupted. Even so, that would only give you a pool to select from. It doesnt decide who gets which position. As far as having peer selection, that would be very vulnerable to turning into a good ole boy network.