Repubblika has written a letter to Prime Minister Robert Abela and Opposition Leader Alex Borg, appealing for the Chief Justice appointment issue to be treated as an issue of State, and not political calculation.

In its letter, Repubblika expressed concern about the damage being caused to the perception of the independence of the judiciary.

"The head of the judiciary should not become the subject of prolonged public confrontation between political parties. The dignity of the office and the credibility of our constitutional order demand a greater sense of responsibility."

It also said that the stagnation in the selection process is very worrying.

Repubblika said that "it is important to state clearly that within the Maltese judiciary there are several individuals of integrity, competence, and recognised experience who are capable of serving as Chief Justice. The impression that it is somehow difficult to find a suitable person on whom agreement can be reached is unfair to the members of the judiciary and misleading for the country. The problem is not a lack of suitable candidates. The problem lies in the way this process is being conducted."

"The requirement of a two-thirds majority was intended to ensure broad consensus and thereby strengthen the legitimacy of the appointment. That principle remains a sound one. The current failure cannot be attributed to any inherent flaw in the idea that it is desirable to seek consensus. Rather, it appears that this process has not been conducted in the spirit of good faith and sense of state responsibility that such a requirement presupposes. A supermajority model requires political maturity. Without it, even the best constitutional mechanisms will fall short."

"A sworn affidavit by a sitting judge alleging that partisan considerations were invoked in the discussions surrounding this appointment gives rise to serious concern. If the leadership of the judiciary is perceived as being subject to political convenience or partisan calculation, this does not merely place pressure on the constitutional framework; it signifies weakness at its very core," Repubblika said.

This, it said, is precisely the risk warned of by the Venice Commission: that a system dependent on parliamentary negotiation may expose the judiciary to political manoeuvring and lobbying between branches of the State that ought to remain distinct. "It appears that this risk has now become a reality."

It said that there should be clarity in terms of what is meant by their calls for an anti-deadlock mechanism. In its letter, Repubblika said that it recognises that the current situation is not sustainable. "The damage being done to the perception of the judiciary's independence, and to the respect it rightfully enjoys, is real and cumulative. There may therefore be a need for a change in the rules. However, any change must lead to a further reduction of political interference in the administration of justice, not to greater majority control, neither in practice nor in appearance."

It also put forward two of its recommendations, that the Chief Justice be chosen from, and from among the members of the judiciary, and that a Constitutional Convention be called to strengthen the democratic institutions in the country.