The Court shall not require a university degree as the sole means of demonstrating competence for judicial, prosecutorial, investigative, enforcement, administrative, research, or other roles where the relevant knowledge and skills can be demonstrated through an alternative competency process.
Where a position requires substantial knowledge of law, the applicant shall demonstrate that knowledge through a transparent and objectively assessed competency process established by the Court.
The competency process may include: a. written examinations; b. oral examinations or interviews; c. analysis of legal problems and hypothetical cases; d. interpretation of Treaty provisions; e. application of relevant law to evidence and factual circumstances; f. preparation of legal submissions or decisions; g. ethical and professional judgement assessments; h. practical exercises relevant to the proposed role; and i. other objectively relevant assessments established by the Court.
The Court shall publish the competencies, knowledge areas, standards, assessment methods, and minimum requirements applicable to each role.
Assessments shall be designed to determine whether an applicant genuinely possesses the knowledge and practical ability required for the role rather than merely whether the applicant possesses a particular educational qualification.
Previous professional experience, legal training, military or police service, judicial experience, investigative experience, academic study, professional qualifications, relevant specialist knowledge, or demonstrated practical competence may be taken into account.
An applicant shall not receive an appointment solely because of wealth, political influence, personal connections, social status, family status, public position, or possession of a particular academic title.
Where a degree or professional licence is legally required for a particular function under applicable national law, the Court shall respect that requirement where it applies to the exercise of that function within the relevant jurisdiction.
The Court may establish different competency levels according to the responsibilities of each position.
Persons seeking judicial or prosecutorial authority shall be required to demonstrate a substantially higher level of legal knowledge, reasoning, independence, ethics, and practical competence than persons seeking administrative or supporting roles.
A person who does not initially meet the required competency standard may be permitted to undertake further training and retake the assessment according to procedures established by the Court.
Assessment procedures shall be designed to prevent favouritism, bribery, discrimination, political interference, or other improper influence.
Where reasonably practicable, examinations and assessments shall be independently marked or reviewed by more than one appropriately qualified assessor.
The Court shall maintain records sufficient to demonstrate that appointments were made according to the published competency requirements.
Candidates shall be informed of the assessment criteria applicable to them before undertaking an examination or competency assessment.
A candidate who believes that an assessment was affected by serious procedural error, bias, corruption, discrimination, or improper conduct may request review in accordance with the Rules of the Court.
The Court may publish anonymised competency standards, sample examinations, assessment guidance, and training materials so that members of the public can understand how competence is established.
The competency process shall not be designed to favour applicants who have attended a particular university, belong to a particular professional organisation, or possess a particular social or economic background.
Nothing in this Article prevents the Court from recognising accredited legal education, professional qualifications, university degrees, or other established qualifications as evidence of competence.
The purpose of alternative competency assessment shall be to ensure that persons exercising authority for the Court are genuinely capable of performing their duties while allowing capable persons without conventional academic backgrounds a fair opportunity to demonstrate their ability.
The Rules of the Court shall establish detailed competency standards, examination procedures, assessor requirements, retesting, appeals, conflicts of interest, publication requirements, and appointment procedures.