ipl-logo

Judicial Appointment System

1076 Words5 Pages

Judges perform a crucial part in the English legal system. Judiciary is one of the three arms of the government. The doctrine of separation of powers ensures that the role of the judiciary is retained independent from the legislative and executive functions of the government.
The formation of the Human Rights Act of 1998 made it easier for the judges to a strict supervision of the parliament and for the executive powers they implement.
In recent times many changes took place in relation to the judiciary. Among those, the House of Lords was replaced by the new Supreme Court as the highest court in the UK, the central role of the Lord Chancellor was condensed and the appointment procedure for judges was also changed.
The Constitutional Reforms …show more content…

An independent Supreme Court has been established separate from the House of Lords and with all its own independent appointment system, staff, budget and building. An independent Judicial Appointments Commission was also made responsible for selecting candidates to recommend for judicial appointment to the Secretary of State or Justice. The JAC ensures that the merit remains the only measure for appointment and the appointment system is up-to-date, open and transparent. An judicial appointments and conduct ombudsman was held responsible for inspecting and making recommendations regarding protests about the Judicial appointments process and management of the judicial conduct complaints within the scope of the …show more content…

The appointment process, has being criticized for being subjugated by politicians, secretive and biased. Judges receive slight training. The real concerns that the independence of the judiciary is not adequately safeguarded.
The challenge facing the new system will be to preserve the high quality of the appointments made while opening up the system so that all well qualified lawyers can compete for judicial office on a level playing field rather than in a system designed for the needs of a small group of elite members of the bar. The degree to which the process promotes diversity in the composition of the judiciary and opens up the recruitment pool to a broader range of candidates has become the litmus test by which the new judicial appointment system will be measured.
Therefore by considering the above facts it can be concluded that the changes relating to the appointment system of the judiciary are necessary and had a good impact but still there is room for more

Show More
Related

  • Judicial Appointments: Checks And Balances In Practice By Rachel Brand

    96 Words  | 1 Pages

    According to the article “Judicial Appointments: Checks and Balances in Practice”, written by Rachel Brand, she states that:

    Read More

  • Dbq Essay On The Judicial Branch

    467 Words  | 2 Pages

    The argument/famous Supreme Court case Madison vs. Marbury asked us the question should the Judicial Branch be able to declare laws unconstitutional. I think the Judicial Branch should be able to declare a law unconstitutional. I believe this because the judicial branch is very small, they have no other checks on any other branch, and they don’t receive any money. The Judicial Branch is so small.

    Read More

  • Term Limits In The Supreme Court

    339 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court is an extremely important part of government. As such, we need healthy judges that are on top of their mental game. Therefore, term limits are necessary because newer judges can have a different point of view, mental health will be reduced, and the majority of Americans support term limits. If we have newer judges they will have a different point of view. In the article, Christopher stated that “It would mean a court that more accurately refers the changes and judgements of the society.”

    Read More

  • Judges Vs Federal Judges Essay

    509 Words  | 3 Pages

    Federal Judges and Supreme Court Justices The process for electing a federal judge is both a simple, yet complicated one. A number of things take place between the need for a nominee and the appointment to a position. The basis for the nomination and appointment of federal judges and Supreme Court Justices is the Appointments Clause (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) of the United States Constitution: “The President...shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law....” First a vacancy must be present at which time the President can make a nomination.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Judges Being Appointed

    167 Words  | 1 Pages

    The quality of judges would without a doubt increase if they were appointed. However, I do not agree with the idea of judges being appointed. When looking at the partisan aspect you notice several possible issues with one issue being, is that individual the right person to do the job. Partisan election of judges allows for an individual that may not be as qualified for the job to be elected into the position. Nevertheless the partisan election of judges gives the voters what they want based on party affiliation along with qualifications.

    Read More

  • The Judicial Branch

    1514 Words  | 7 Pages

    The Judicial Branch incorporates the Supreme Court, the most noteworthy court in the United States, as well as other government courts. The judges of the Supreme Court are selected by the president and must be endorsed by Senate. Federal cases, such as Marbury vs. Madison, made the Supreme Court "a separate branch of government on par with Congress and the" executive branch (McBride, 2007, P.1). The motivation behind this case was to affirm the power of the Supreme Court to survey law, to figure out if or not that law is sacred, and to set up the check and offsets. We see these techniques existing today in our nation, in light of the fact that every branch can check the other to keep one branch from turning out to be too intense from the others, as legal over official can pronounce official activities illegal, official over legal can select Supreme Court judges, Legislative over Judicial can change the size of government court framework and the quantity of Supreme Court judges, and so on.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Gerald Rosenberg's Book 'The Hollow Hope'

    710 Words  | 3 Pages

    Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.

    Read More

  • The Texas Judicial System

    918 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Texas judicial system is bifurcated, where there are two supreme courts to serve justice. While one of the “highest courts” serves justice to civil cases, the other serves justice to criminal cases. Tom Phillips, former chief justice on the Texas Supreme Court, stated “Of the ways you can elect judges, Texas has one of the worst systems” (Chammah). Judicial elections in Texas have been impacted greatly by campaign contributions from interests’ groups, PAC’s, and law firms. In addition, partisan elections and low voter knowledge has made it more facile for these interest group to lobby their way into the legislative branch, thus, spreading into the judicial branch where elections count the most.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Broken Bench

    247 Words  | 1 Pages

    The article Broken Bench explains the controversy over having “tiny courts” in New York State. The author, William Glaberson argues that the idea of justice within the jurisdiction of these tiny courts is unfairly decided among the justices in charge. Due to the lack of experience of these justices, it is difficult for fair justice to be dealt out. One of the major causes explained by the author for unfair justice is that the justices of the court are very inexperienced. For example, William Glaberson states, “Nearly three-quarters of the judges are not lawyers, and many — truck drivers, sewer workers or laborers — have scant grasp of the most basic legal principles.

    Read More

  • The Constrained Court

    429 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Court’s effectiveness relies on the institutional capacities as well as the ruling’s popularity. When lower-court judges comply with Supreme Court decisions, rulings can have a substantial effect on social policies, as in the case

    Read More

  • Circuit Courts Dbq

    712 Words  | 3 Pages

    It was the Presidential election of 1800 where Thomas Jefferson won against John Adams. Around this time, Congress had passed the Judiciary Act of 1801. This act altered the Judiciary Act of 1789 in establishing ten new district courts. This was to expand the number of circuit courts from three to six, add additional judges to each circuit, and give the President the authority to appoint Federal judges and justices of the peace. This act also reduced the number of Supreme Court justices from six to five.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Judicial Selection Methods

    462 Words  | 2 Pages

    In addition to judicial selection methods, at the federal level, the president and senate get to appoint seats to judges, in which they will have for life. In my opinion, I think this selection method is good to some extent because I trust that the president and senate have good judgment when it comes to picking judges that will be independent, fair, and accountable. At the state level, electing judges varies from state to state. In

    Read More

  • Essay On Judicial Selection

    801 Words  | 4 Pages

    Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

    Read More

  • The Canadian Judicial System

    1155 Words  | 5 Pages

    It is independent of the legislative and executive branches. Judges are public officers appointed to preside in a court of justice, to interpret and apply the laws of Canada (The Canadian Encyclopedia, n.d.). Talking about the qualities required by a judge, they are required to have the highest standards of integrity in both their professional and personal lives. They should be highly knowledgeable about the law, willing to undertake in-depth legal research, and able to write decisions that are fair and convincing. Their judgment should be clear, and they should be able to make informed decisions that will stand up to close scrutiny and issues arising from the disputes.

    Read More

  • Role Of Judiciary In Malaysia

    1103 Words  | 5 Pages

    Malaysian judiciary refers to the Malaysian court system. It is an independent body separate from the legislative and executive arms of government. The role of courts is to ensure the law and order are followed, that justice is done, and criminals are punished. The head of the judiciary is the Chief Justice.

    Read More

More about Judicial Appointment System

Open Document