Independence of Judiciary
- Created by: Francesca
- Created on: 12-04-14 11:28
View mindmap
- Independence of Judiciary
- Definition: The principle that members of the judiciary should remain independent from any influence by government or parties or other political movements
- How is it maintained?
- Security of tenure
- Judges appointed for an open-ended term
- Only limit - must retire by age of 75
- Politicians cannot seek to bring influence by threatening to sack or suspend them
- Judges appointed for an open-ended term
- Guaranteed salaries paid from the Consolidation Fund
- beyond everyday political control
- Cannot be altered with aim of putting pressure on them
- Judges free to make decisions they see fit - without fear of financial penalty
- Politicians unable to offer financial inducements to make the decision they want
- beyond everyday political control
- The offence of contempt of court
- Under sub judice rules - media, ministers and other individuals - prevented from publicly speaking out during legal proceedings
- Ensure justice is administered fairly
- without undue pressure from politicians or the public
- A growing separation of powers
- Downgrading of the post of Lord Chancellor
- Previously held significant roles in all branches of government
- Creation of a new UK Supreme Court
- Enhanced separation between the senior judiciary and other branches of government
- Prior to changes - most senior judges - Law Lords - sat in HoL
- Enhanced separation between the senior judiciary and other branches of government
- Downgrading of the post of Lord Chancellor
- Independent appointments system
- The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 - creation of an Independent Judicial Appointments Commission
- Brought greater transparency to process of judicial appointments
- Address concerns that previous system had been open to political bias
- Background of Senior Judges
- Most have served an 'apprenticeship' as barristers and come to the bench having achieved a certain status within their chosen profession
- Take considerable pride in their legal standing
- Unlikely to defer to politicians or public opinion - would be seen to compromise their judiciary integrity
- Security of tenure
- Effectiveness of Independence
- There is still some political input into senior appointments, despite the Commission
- Politicians, often publicly criticise rulings handed down by senior judges
- E.g. In 2013 - Home Secretary, Theresa May accused judges of making the UK a more dangerous place by disregarding rules aimed at deporting foreign criminals
- Saying that some judges were using Article 8 of the ECHR (the right to a family life) to justify granting foreign criminals the right to remain in the UK
- E.g. In 2013 - Home Secretary, Theresa May accused judges of making the UK a more dangerous place by disregarding rules aimed at deporting foreign criminals
- It is argued that the Supreme Court is only a ‘cosmetic’ exercise.
- No way of entrenching this independence - principle of parliamentary sovereignty means that it effectively rests on the will of the HoC and HoL
- Judges are ultimately appointed by the executive and PMs can exercise their power of veto
- Although Justice Ministry does not exert direct control over judges, it still exercises considerable influence over the legal system
- Importance
- Absence of Judicial independence will threaten judicial neutrality
- As ff judges are subjected to external control, their impartiality will be compromised
- Allows judges to do to right thing and apply justice properly without fear of the consequences
- Uphold the rule of law
- To allow democracy to exist and flourish
- Montesquieu - "There is no liberty, if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative ans executive"
- Absence of Judicial independence will threaten judicial neutrality
Comments
No comments have yet been made