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.

it can be seen that any legal cases in the UK is mainly depend on the decisions made in courts. Thus, judges who exercise judicial power must have responsibility to rule and provide justice impartially and not for personal advantages. To make sure the function of judiciary is operated properly, specific qualifications have been established. For instance, a judge is not allowed to engaged in any case that he is, in any nature, a part of an interest. If a case has a direct interest to the judge, he will not hear it, but he will commonly proclaim it and ask the parties if they are pleased that he should do the case [judiciary.gov. 2018]. In the Case of Pinochet (1999), the House of Lords had to dismiss the previous decision it had held and the appeal was heard again by different judges. This was due to a fact that one of the judge appeared to be partial and not independence in which his relation to a campaigning organization directly involved in the case. Apart from that, the judiciary is completely self-sufficient and independent from the government power. Judges are appointed and can not be replaced until retirement [lawteacher.net. 2018]. Obviously, if there is misconduct of law, the judge will not be safe and, in certain situation, it may allow sentences. Nevertheless, there is ample protection from the system of appeal [lawteacher.net.2018].

From this, it can be assumed that the judiciary is one of the vital branch for any democratic society. The function of judiciary is to preserve the rights of general people and watch out the constitution zealously. It is the great hope for people when they face the harassment and threat from government forces. In order to reach the goal, the judiciary require independence to freely perform their judicial powers without the intervention from litigants, the governments, the media and powerful individuals or organizations. This is a very necessary principle since the matters in court are often decided between the general people and the state or the general people and powerful entities. 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. 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. 2018]. Moreover, in order to achieve a fair decision, the judges must be free from the fear that they can be sued for defamation during the course of proceedings to make adverse comments. Finally, there are many cases prove that the judiciary is fair and impartial in giving decision, even in controversial situation. For instance, in the case of Greater London Council (GLC), Lord Denning MR said all three members of the Court were interested on all sides. They were all benefiting from the decrease in fares of public transport from GLC. Nevertheless, there was no objection to them hearing the court from both side, so the panel of judges stayed the same. As a result, the House of Lords held that GLC had acted ultra vires.

To conclude, independence of judiciary is the core factor to form an equitable, fair and democratic society. This principle help avoided the corruption in the government system by balancing the power of all three main branches. Also, judiciary is the justice scale for the citizens to fight against the political forces when there is harassment or unfairness. But, many people aware that an abuse of power can still be possible to happen in the independence of judiciary. The reasons for this have been mentioned above, each branch of the government system is accountable to certain agency and should be answerable to the judiciary. But in the case of judiciary, a separate set of new rules and standards is applied. Some people consider the judiciary is the judge of its own cause [lawteacher.net. 2018]. So it is reasonable to ask how to balance the judicial independence and judicial accountability

As a matter of fact, there are actually various ways that restrain the judiciary power as well as make certain that the judges are accountable for their performances. Having said before, if a judge is found to have committed a crime, he can be investigated by the Office of Judicial Complaints and will possibly be subject to a disciplinary penalty relate to the statutory provision. In reality, however, the judges are subject to a different form of accountability which called “explanatory accountability” [judiciary.gov. 2018]. This means that the judges may be requested for an account as to why they have acted in such a way. This form of accountability is applied to the judges in numerous way. All together, a significant degree of accountability is ensured.

In addition, there are other forms of accountability that allow inspection of individual judicial decision and the judiciary as an institution. Firstly, the media usually delivers report on the process and result of legal cases, and also illustrate their opinions on a judge’s decision [judiciary.gov. 2018]. Through the media, this form of accountability enables inspection of judges in individual. Secondly, the Lord Chief Justice, after the Constitutional Reform Act, declared that he would establish a regular report about the field that the judiciary is now responsible, and to address matters that he considered to be necessary for the judiciary and the administration of justice in England and Wales [judiciary.gov. 2018]. Finally, an annual report on judges’ performance in the whole year will be provided including reviews of the local Resident Judge, Designated Civil or Designated Family Judge [judiciary.gov. 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. 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.

References:

Shetreet, S. (1976). Judges on trial. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Stevens, R. (1997). The independence of the judiciary. Oxford: Clarendon.

Publications.parliament.uk. (2018). House of Lords - In Re Pinochet. [online] Available at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199899/ldjudgmt/jd990115/pino01.htm [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].

Judiciary.gov.uk. (2018). Judicial accountability and independence. [online] Available at: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-judiciary-the-government-and-the-constitution/jud-acc-ind/ [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].

Lawteacher.net. (2018). Problems In Judicial Accountability. [online] Available at: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitutional-law/problems-in-judicial-accountability-constitutional-law-essay.php [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].

Lawteacher.net. (2018). THE CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE. [online] Available at: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitutional-law/the-concept-of-judicial-independence-law-essay.php#ftn4 [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].

---