JUSTIFICATION FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY:
Judicial review means the power of courts to review decisions of other organs of the governments.
The very existence of this power brings the question of accountability. It must be checked whether such overriding powers are properly exercised, in good faith and with responsibility and judicial accountability is the best modus operandi to undertake such a task.
The need of accountability becomes far more justified when the power exercised under judicial review take the shape of activism and interferes more and more on the province of other organs of state. In fact ,in US, one of the reasons for the development of this doctrine was because of activism of the courts, this is true even in Indian context, and in fact, it is one of the dominant reasons for the framing of the 2006 Bill. It is always necessary to check the concentration of powers in hands of one organ of the state, as the principle of constitutionalism directs, and Judicial Accountability can be one of the methods to check the concentration of power in the hands of judiciary, judiciary must not shy away from this doctrine, and this will-in-turn benefit the judiciary itself.
A judiciary officer while exercising the authority, he shall be free from apprehension of personal consequence to himself.
Judicial Independence is regarded even as human right, as provided by Act 10 of UNDHR (United Nations Declaration on Human Rights) which enunciates that everyone is entitled to fill equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, this doctrine also includes economic independence.
Alexander Hamilton pointed out that limitation on the government can be prescribed in practice in no other way than through the medium of courts of justice. Without this all reservations of particular Rights and Privileges would amount to nothing.
Judicial Independence ensures that powerful individuals must conform to law. Need of the judicial Independence is not for the Judges are the judiciary Parse.
The judges have important social role in the preservation of liberty; establishment of stable government depends on the strength of Judicial Independence. However, independence of judiciary is not absolute, it should not be construed in a manner to confer immunity from the demands of justice for misdeeds or to protect a judge from investigation & ensure for valid charge, and nevertheless the advocates of Independence observe that the judges should not be held accountable for rule of law.
This canvasses the picture of conflict between judicial independence and judicial accountability. But they are inseparable and not inconsistent with each other. Judicial accountability is a facet of Judicial Independence., still in certain situations they may conflict.
Judicial review means the power of courts to review decisions of other organs of the governments.
The very existence of this power brings the question of accountability. It must be checked whether such overriding powers are properly exercised, in good faith and with responsibility and judicial accountability is the best modus operandi to undertake such a task.
The need of accountability becomes far more justified when the power exercised under judicial review take the shape of activism and interferes more and more on the province of other organs of state. In fact ,in US, one of the reasons for the development of this doctrine was because of activism of the courts, this is true even in Indian context, and in fact, it is one of the dominant reasons for the framing of the 2006 Bill. It is always necessary to check the concentration of powers in hands of one organ of the state, as the principle of constitutionalism directs, and Judicial Accountability can be one of the methods to check the concentration of power in the hands of judiciary, judiciary must not shy away from this doctrine, and this will-in-turn benefit the judiciary itself.
A judiciary officer while exercising the authority, he shall be free from apprehension of personal consequence to himself.
Judicial Independence is regarded even as human right, as provided by Act 10 of UNDHR (United Nations Declaration on Human Rights) which enunciates that everyone is entitled to fill equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, this doctrine also includes economic independence.
Alexander Hamilton pointed out that limitation on the government can be prescribed in practice in no other way than through the medium of courts of justice. Without this all reservations of particular Rights and Privileges would amount to nothing.
Judicial Independence ensures that powerful individuals must conform to law. Need of the judicial Independence is not for the Judges are the judiciary Parse.
The judges have important social role in the preservation of liberty; establishment of stable government depends on the strength of Judicial Independence. However, independence of judiciary is not absolute, it should not be construed in a manner to confer immunity from the demands of justice for misdeeds or to protect a judge from investigation & ensure for valid charge, and nevertheless the advocates of Independence observe that the judges should not be held accountable for rule of law.
This canvasses the picture of conflict between judicial independence and judicial accountability. But they are inseparable and not inconsistent with each other. Judicial accountability is a facet of Judicial Independence., still in certain situations they may conflict.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment