they also underlined the need for greater separation from the Executive power through strengthening financial resources allocated to the judiciary. This is because the courts depend on the Executive Power, in terms of financing of their activities. Such dependency also include material means which makes the Judiciary power with very little control to really assume a posture of greater separation with the political power7. 50. Therefore, given these diverging positions, it seems that there is a huge challenge in this context, to, among others aspects; make an open, deep and constructive reflexion among the peers on these issues in order to do away, once for all, with the perception on the absence of power separation of power between the magistrates and the Executive Power. Such separation is indeed foreseen by the Constitution of the Republic. In this context, the Association of Magistrates and the Prosecuting Council have started, in an exemplary manner, a debate and it is expected that this will involve all stakeholders in the judicial field including the Executive Power. 51. In as far as the APR Panel´s recommendations on the activities of the Parliament, it should be noted that in accordance with the Constitution there are two sessions which last 90 days each. However, in the period between the two sessions, the members of Parliament (MPs) do their political work in their constituencies overseeing the governance action and publicising the main laws approved by the plenary of the Parliament. 52. As for the recommendation of the APR Panel to the need to increase continuously the budget of the Parliament, to allow it to improve its performance, the Government informed that it has been gradually increasing the stake of the budged since 2010, as per the letter sent to the APRM National Forum: in 2010 the Parliament received an amount of 501,859,130.00 MT; in 2011, 566,440,049.32MT and in 2012 an amount of 649,825,740.00MT. However, in real terms, the Parliament has been complaining for the fact that the amount allocated by the State Budget is not sufficient for the efficient implementation of tasks that by Law are under its responsibility. 53. With reference to the recommendation of the APR Panel on the need for the Parliament to improve the overseeing activities of the Government, the Parliament has been doing all its best in the context of its prerogative and working capacities in terms of human and financial resources. However, it is so much concerning that the recommendations made by the Administrative Court on the General State Account are repeated from one year to another due to non observation of them by the Executive power and because some limitations are persistent by some MPs to analyse the General State Account for a better performance in their activities of overseeing. These observations are backed up by reports and opinions of the Administrative Court. 54. Given the mentioned scenario, there are a set of challenges that the “House of the People” is faced with in relation to the effective increase of its performance, namely: (i) find mechanisms for make the activities of the PMs on a full time which is also dependent upon Constitutional Review; (ii) re-examine the budget of the Parliament vis- 7 In the above mentioned meeting, one magistrate argued that “it is almost impossible to work without the District Government because we do not have vehicles, houses and sometimes we do not have working rooms. Therefore, we have to beg to the District Government”. 27