Abstract The independence of judges sitting on international courts is constrained in part by their accountability to the states that appoint them. The interaction between these two principles is particularly stark where judges are able to have their terms of office on the bench renewed, subject to the agreement of states to re-nominate and reappoint them. The present article seeks to examine this interaction, initially in the context more generally of international judicial decision-making bodies, while also considering options designed to reduce the likelihood of the reoccurrence of problems with respect to reappointments. It then provides a more detailed case study of the Norwegian reappointment saga at the EFTA Court and suggests possible ways forward designed to enhance judicial independence in this procedure.