The information presented in this research is based on the latest changes made in the national legislation that regulates the activity of the Supreme Council of Magistracy and the Commission for certifying judges, with showing some normative vagueness and proposing solutions for solving possible difficulties. We start with talking about the essence of the Supreme Council of Magistracy as an authority of judicial self-management and a guarantee of justice independence, about the role and the necessity of a Commission for certifying judges and, at last, we see for ourselves that the actual legislation in the field of justice is not perfect and has to be improved. Some of the problems we write about are the following: judges have not real possibilities to prepare professionally to their certifying, the subjects for estimating the level of theoretical and practical preparedness of the judges are not published before the exams, the members of the mentioned Commission are not remunerated for their work, enjoying just the prestige of their statute. The numerical ratio between professors and judges as members of the Commission for certifying judges is not absolutely clear; we consider that the number of judges must be larger than the number of university professors. There are no norms that settle the situation of incompatibility for professors – members of the Commission and the principles of their activity, as it is in the case of judges, whose statute is based on the constitutional principles of independence and impartiality. We are sure of the topical interest born by this paper because of the novelties promoted in its content and especially because of the recent changes made in the national legislative system. The work has not a political or an electoral orientation, the most important aim being to increase the quality and efficiency of national justice.