• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

An independent judiciary is regarded as if it were the font of justice, the rule of law and individual rights Such worship of judicial independence is not sustainable While there is no doubt that a measure of judicial independence is a good thing, such independence must be kept in balance with judicial accountability. F. Cross Thoughts on Goldilocks and Judicial Independence (2003) 64 Ohio State Law Journal 195. Critically discuss this statement.

Extracts from this document...


Transfer-Encoding: chunked Student Number: 34614893 Module: 101x Law School Electronic Coursework Cover Sheet Student Number (on library card): 34614893 Module Name: LAW.101x: English Legal System and Method Module Mnemonic: 101x Question Title: Question 1 Word Count: 1693 Plagiarism Declaration: I declare that this submission is my own work. I have not submitted it in substantially the same form towards the award of a degree or other qualification. It has not been written or composed by any other person and all sources have been appropriately referenced. I consent to my electronically submitted work being stored electronically and copied for assessment purposes, including being submitted to Turnitin (a plagiarism detection system) in order to check the integrity of my assessed work. This Cover Sheet must be used for all Coursework submitted in Lancaster University Law School ? failure to use this Cover Sheet may result in the work being treated as a non-submission. Please start the text of your Coursework on Page 2 of this document The judicial independence is usually understood as the principle which the judiciary would not be affected politically by the power of executive and legislature. Sometimes, this principle is considered to represent justice, the rule of law and individual rights. However, many believe such thoughts of independent judiciary is not enduring. ...read more.


If facing too much pressure from the forces outside the courtroom, judges may or may not admit particular evidence to serve certain purpose [judiciary.gov. 2018]. From there, they could direct the jury or pass sentences unfairly. Such scenario is immoral and unacceptable in a Democracy. Although the importance of independent judiciary is clear, its practical effectiveness is usually put in question [judiciary.gov. 2018]. To be precise, judges are immune to any prosecution relate to their execution of judicial function.[5] Also, in the course of hearing cases, judges can not be sued for defamation for whatever they say to parties and witnesses. What is more, the duty to ensure justice for the people is merely considered as the responsibility carried by the judges [lawteacher.net. 2018], which is quite vague and questionable. It should be acknowledged that judges are human as well, they are the products of the society. They they can be fallible, bias and prejudice. those perspectives around the principle of judicial independence have created a belief that judges are above the law. However, such thinking of judiciary is incorrect. In fact, judges and any other individual are subject to the law in the same manner [judiciary.gov. 2018]. If a judge is found guilty for a criminal offense, it will be appropriate for the Lord Chief Justice or Lord Chancellor to refer him to the Judicial Complaints Investigations Office to remove him from current position [judiciary.gov. ...read more.


2018]. As a whole, judicial accountability is absolutely valuable in the matter of balancing the power of judiciary in a democratic country. It helps avoided any corruption in the government system and also strengthen the citizens? rights and freedom.[9] Nonetheless, there are wonders around the conflict between judicial independence and judicial accountability as these principles seem to pull in opposite direction. If the judiciary is absolutely independent, there can be an abuse of power. In contrast, judicial accountability can cause pressure on judges and lead to unjust decision for personal purpose. As a matter of fact, both principles, however, are complimentary to one another [lawteacher.net. 2018]. The function of judicial accountability is to preserve the independence and integrity of the judiciary. First of all, it promotes the rule of law through preventing conducts that might restrain judicial independence. Next, it enhances the confidence of citizens in the fairness and justice that judiciary can bring. Lastly, it indicates the institutional responsibility of judiciary towards the general people. From this perspective, it is clear that judicial independence and judicial accountability are both element that help formed a fair and liberal society in a Democracy. In conclusion, judicial independence plays an important part in any democratic countries. It is the core factor to ensure the freedom and rights of citizens. Keeping judicial independence balance with judicial accountability will advance the function of judiciary as a whole and improve equality in the society. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree English Legal System section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree English Legal System essays

  1. Critically analyse the effectiveness of lay people and compare and contrast the roles played ...

    crime being committed, and that this may involve using 'such force as is reasonable in all the circumstances'.18 The defendants pointed out that the plane was part of a consignment due to be sold to the Government of Indonesia, which was involved in oppressive measures against the population of East Timor, a region forcibly annexed by Indonesia in 1975.

  2. Discuss advantages and disadvantages of using the literal rule. Question . ...

    or statute law unless express provision is made, or the new law is irreconcilable with the statute or common law. Judges may not decide that a law is illegal or unconstitutional: Chenny v. Conn: the production of nuclear weapons under an Act allegedly contravened a treaty prohibiting their manufacturer.

  1. 'The Land Registration Act 2002 makes a poor attempt at reforming the law of ...

    On expiry of the term 'Pye' required Graham to vacate the land, however Graham remained in occupation, continuing to farm the land. Requests by Graham to enter subject to further agreements were never offered until 'Pye' sought possession in 1998.

  2. Discuss Dicey's three propositions on the concept of the Rule of Law in the ...

    It lasted 45 minutes and prompted Michael Howard to retort that she should not question his integrity. On 18th November the Commons used the Parliament Act to force through the Hunting Bill. Following disagreement between the Commons and the Lords, the Parliament Act was invoked for only the fourth time since 1949 to force a Bill through.

  1. Explain what is meant by the rule of law.Consider whether the rule of law ...

    It can be argued that the rule of law is too vague or intangible to offer better protection of individual liberty than a codified set of constitutional rights. At least if the law is laid down on paper then it is surely more accessible and easier to obey.

  2. Sources of Law - Judicial precedent.

    the car, this was an omission and the actus reus required was a positive act. His appeal was dismissed and the court held that driving on to the officers foot and staying there was one continuous act, rather than an act followed by an omission - so long as the

  1. Why was there so much variation in the judicial prosecution of witchcraft within Early ...

    had to believe in what the accused was being charged with, in order to gain a conviction. Despite ideas and publications linking witchcraft to the devil originating with the papacy in Italy and Spain, diabolical apostasy was not a widespread belief amongst the elite and the inquisitors there, and therefore prosecutions remained very low.

  2. In Thorner v- Major, the House of Lords confirmed that a claimant seeking to ...

    a sub-species of promissory estoppel."40 The House of Lord's in Thorner also clarified that the correct approach for landowner's intention was an objective test and that it was "enough that the meaning he conveyed would reasonably have been understood as intended to be taken seriously as an assurance which could

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work