The new Article 94 par 8-1 provides that persons running for the position of judge are obliged to state in writing, that they waive their rights to privacy while they are in office; any failure to do so would result in their ineligibility (see also comments on Article 2 par 9 of the Draft Law on Transitional Provisions which addresses the issue of the temporal applicability of this new requirement, in par 116 infra). Although reference is made to possible limits that would be determined in constitutional law, such a general, and obligatory waiver of the right to privacy appears hardly justifiable under international standards. Article 17 of the ICCPR states that “[n]o one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation” and that “[e]veryone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks”. Hence the right to privacy is guaranteed to every individual, including judges. Moreover, interferences, even if provided for by law, should be in accordance with the provisions, aims and objectives of the ICCPR and should be, in any event, reasonable in the particular circumstances. Any legislation providing for such interferences must also clearly and strictly set out the conditions and circumstances for their application and provide adequate substantive and procedural safeguards against abuse.