The CSM approves the resolution introducing psycho-aptitude tests for magistrates

The measure will be preceded by a trial phase: a committee of teachers will draw up the tests, which will then have to be approved by the Council. It will be fully implemented in 2028. The assessment will cover five areas: cognitive, emotional, relational, ethical and values-based, and organisational.

16 SEP 26
Translated by AI
Image of The CSM approves the resolution introducing psycho-aptitude tests for magistrates

Photo: Ansa

The CSM has given the go-ahead to the resolution setting out the ‘conditions of unsuitability for judicial office’, in relation to the psycho-aptitude tests for magistrates provided for under the 2024 reform. The plenary session, with six abstentions, unanimously approved the document proposed by the Sixth Commission. The measure will be preceded by a trial phase: according to the resolution, a committee of academics will draw up the tests, which must then be approved by the Council. The tests will also form part of the oral examination in the next recruitment competition. The assessment will cover five areas: cognitive, emotional, interpersonal, ethical and values-based, and organisational. The framework, the result of work by experts, will be fully implemented in 2028.
The measure aims to identify, with a view to the future development of the tests, “those grounds for unsuitability to which the legislator refers and the assessment of which the tests must be geared towards”. The conditions of unsuitability, which are intended to prevent access to a career as a public prosecutor or judge, must be ascertained “following a process that begins with the administration of tests, continues with an interview conducted by the chair of the session with the assistance of a specialist psychologist, and concludes with an evaluative summary drawn up by the entire examination committee (or sub-committee)”. The resolution approved by the plenary session emphasises that the psycho-aptitude tests, developed in collaboration with four expert psychologists, are a tool “designed to ascertain the absence of grounds for ineligibility, not to diagnose pathological conditions”.