In Colombia’s judicial system, the terna plays a crucial role in the selection of magistrates for both the Constitutional Court (Corte Constitucional) and the Supreme Court of Justice (Corte Suprema de Justicia). The terna, meaning a “set of three,” is a list of three candidates submitted by a nominating entity to the body responsible for the final appointment. Understanding the terna process is essential for comprehending the dynamics of judicial appointments and the independence of the judiciary in Colombia.
For the Constitutional Court, the President of Colombia, the Supreme Court of Justice, and the Council of State (Consejo de Estado) each submit a terna to the Senate. The Senate then selects one magistrate from each terna. This system ensures a degree of balance in the Court’s composition, as it draws candidates proposed by different branches of government. The Constitutional Court’s primary function is to safeguard the Colombian Constitution, reviewing laws and government actions to ensure their conformity with the constitutional text and principles. The magistrates of the Constitutional Court serve eight-year terms.
The terna process for the Supreme Court of Justice is different. In this case, the Judicial Branch Nomination Council (Consejo Superior de la Judicatura) creates a terna and submits it to the Supreme Court itself. The Supreme Court then elects one of the candidates from the terna to fill a vacant magistrate position. This self-selection mechanism is intended to promote judicial independence and expertise, as the court members are best positioned to assess the qualifications and suitability of potential colleagues. The Supreme Court is the highest court of ordinary jurisdiction, responsible for resolving civil, criminal, labor, and commercial disputes. Supreme Court magistrates also have eight-year terms.
The terna system aims to avoid a concentration of power in a single entity when appointing magistrates. By involving multiple nominating bodies, it promotes a more diverse pool of candidates and reduces the potential for political influence in the selection process. However, the system is not without its critics. Concerns are often raised about the political motivations of the entities submitting the ternas, and the possibility that candidates may be chosen based on their perceived loyalty rather than their legal qualifications. The Senate’s involvement in selecting Constitutional Court magistrates, in particular, has been criticized as potentially politicizing the process.
Moreover, the composition of the Judicial Branch Nomination Council, which submits ternas to the Supreme Court, is itself subject to political influences, as its members are appointed by various branches of government. This indirect political influence can affect the composition of the ternas presented to the Supreme Court. Despite these criticisms, the terna system remains a central feature of Colombia’s judicial appointment process, designed to safeguard the independence and integrity of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Justice.
Ongoing debates surrounding judicial reform in Colombia often involve discussions about refining the terna process to enhance transparency, meritocracy, and judicial independence, ensuring that the most qualified and impartial individuals are selected to serve on these crucial judicial bodies.
1880×1254 corte suprema integra terna de aspirantes la corte constitucional corte from cortesuprema.gov.co 
1200×900 tras meses corte suprema escoge terna magistrado de from www.radionacional.co