role of judiciary essay

Essay on Role of Judiciary in the Country for Students and Children

500 words essay on role of judiciary in the country today.

Any judiciary is an integral part of a country, especially democracy . As India is the largest democracy, we have a big judiciary which makes sure it safeguards the interests of its citizens. Similarly, our Supreme Court is at the top of our judiciary system. It is then followed by our high courts which operate at the state level. Further, there are district courts operating at the district level. There are also many more courts below this order. A judiciary has many roles to play.

Role of Judiciary in India

As a judiciary is independent of the executive, it can easily safeguard the rights of the citizen to ensure peace and harmony. However, its role is not just limited to this. It plays different roles to make sure there is smooth functioning in the country.

Firstly, it plays a great role in making new laws. Judiciary is the rightful interpreter of our constitution as well as the current laws. It has the power to create new laws as well as overrule policies that might violate our constitution.

Furthermore, the judiciary also prevents any form of violation of the law. Similarly, it files a lawsuit against the person found guilty of doing the same. After that, a judge passes his verdict after listening to both parties closely and announces the judgment accordingly.

Moreover, it also acts as an advisory body. It happens more than often that the executive or legislature seeks help from the judiciary to clarify issues regarding the constitution.

Moreover, the judiciary decides upon the constitutional questions. For instance, if there is a dispute between states, they are brought to the Supreme Court where it decides how to interpret the constitution on the basis of the on-going dispute. In addition, it also looks after the administrating bit. Like it is responsible for appointing officers, maintaining records, administrating staff and more.

Most importantly, the judiciary is the protector of fundamental rights of the citizens. Everyone has the right to fundamental rights; however, sometimes people try to take them away. Thus, the judiciary ensures no such thing happens and lets every citizen live with harmony.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Importance in Today’s Scenario

A judiciary is very crucial in upholding a democracy like ours. As we all know, cases of injustice against people have risen nowadays. There is unjust discrimination happening and the judiciary must step in to stop all this.

Therefore, it becomes important more than ever to help people feel safe within their own country and homes. Judiciary checks and balances the ones who have power. This helps in preventing people from misusing that power.

In short, in today’s scenario of our country where crimes are happening rapidly, people turn to the judiciary for justice . Thus, we see how it is so very important that judiciary remains just and empowered in the times of darkness. Sometimes, it remains the single ray of hope for people, which is why it is needed more than ever now.

FAQs on Role of Judiciary in the Country Today

Q.1 What is the role of the judiciary in the country today?

A.1 The judiciary plays a major role in a democracy. It safeguards the fundamental rights of the people. Further, it makes new laws and ensures to punish anyone violating these laws. It also administers and appoints officers.

Q.2 Why is the judiciary important in the country today?

A.2 The judiciary is more important than ever now because injustice against people has risen to a great extent in our country. We need it to monitor the people and punish them for their crimes so everyone feels safe and included.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Essay on Judiciary

Students are often asked to write an essay on Judiciary in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Judiciary

Introduction to judiciary.

The judiciary is an important part of our government. It is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in legal cases.

Role of Judiciary

The judiciary’s main role is to ensure justice. They decide disputes between people, and between people and the government.

Judges and Their Function

Judges are the main part of the judiciary. They listen to cases, consider the evidence, and make fair decisions based on the law.

Importance of Judiciary

The judiciary is crucial for maintaining law and order. It protects our rights and ensures everyone is treated fairly.

250 Words Essay on Judiciary

Introduction, the role of the judiciary.

The judiciary’s primary role is to interpret and apply laws to specific cases, providing a platform for dispute resolution. It ensures the rule of law is upheld, where everyone, irrespective of their social, economic, or political status, is subject to the law and equal in its eyes.

Independence of Judiciary

The independence of the judiciary is a cornerstone principle ensuring impartiality. It is safeguarded by provisions such as security of tenure, fixed salaries, and the power of contempt, which collectively insulate judges from external pressures and influences.

Judicial Review

Judicial review is a powerful tool in the judiciary’s arsenal, allowing it to review the constitutionality of laws and governmental actions. This function serves as a check on legislative and executive powers, preventing any potential misuse or overreach.

Challenges to Judiciary

Despite its critical role, the judiciary faces several challenges. These include backlog of cases, limited accessibility, and allegations of corruption. Addressing these issues is crucial to ensure the judiciary’s effectiveness and credibility.

In summary, the judiciary is a vital institution in any democratic society. Its independence, power of judicial review, and role in upholding the rule of law are fundamental to maintaining justice and order. However, it is equally important to address the challenges it faces to ensure its continued effectiveness.

500 Words Essay on Judiciary

The role and importance of the judiciary, the structure of the judiciary.

Judicial systems vary widely among countries. However, a common feature is a multi-tiered structure. At the lowest level are courts that handle minor civil and criminal cases. Appeals from these courts are heard by higher courts, culminating in a supreme or constitutional court. These highest courts typically deal with questions of constitutional interpretation and judicial review of legislation.

Independence of the Judiciary

Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the rule of law. It ensures that judges can make decisions free from political pressure or personal bias. A judiciary that is independent can uphold the principle of separation of powers, preventing any branch of government from becoming too powerful. Judicial independence is safeguarded through various mechanisms, including security of tenure, transparent appointment processes, and protection from arbitrary removal.

Judicial Review and Checks and Balances

The judiciary and human rights.

The judiciary plays a crucial role in safeguarding human rights. Courts interpret and apply human rights law, providing remedies when rights are violated. They also play a normative role, shaping societal understanding of human rights through their judgments. In many jurisdictions, the judiciary has been instrumental in advancing social justice, using the law to challenge discrimination and inequality.

Challenges Facing the Judiciary

Despite its crucial role, the judiciary faces several challenges. These include corruption, political interference, and limited resources, which can undermine its effectiveness and public confidence in its decisions. Moreover, the judiciary often has to navigate complex societal issues and balance competing interests, making its role both challenging and controversial.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Classroom Programme
• Interview Guidance
• Online Programme
• Drishti Store
• My Bookmarks
• My Progress
• Change Password
• From The Editor's Desk
• How To Use The New Website
• Help Centre

Achievers Corner

• Topper's Interview
• About Civil Services
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• GS Prelims Strategy
• Prelims Analysis
• GS Paper-I (Year Wise)
• GS Paper-I (Subject Wise)
• CSAT Strategy
• Previous Years Papers
• Practice Quiz
• Weekly Revision MCQs
• 60 Steps To Prelims
• Prelims Refresher Programme 2020

Mains & Interview

• Mains GS Syllabus
• Mains GS Strategy
• Mains Answer Writing Practice
• Essay Strategy
• Fodder For Essay
• Model Essays
• Drishti Essay Competition
• Ethics Strategy
• Ethics Case Studies
• Ethics Discussion
• Ethics Previous Years Q&As
• Papers By Years
• Papers By Subject
• Be MAINS Ready
• Awake Mains Examination 2020
• Interview Strategy
• Interview Guidance Programme

Current Affairs

• Daily News & Editorial
• Daily CA MCQs
• Sansad TV Discussions
• Monthly CA Consolidation
• Monthly Editorial Consolidation
• Monthly MCQ Consolidation

Drishti Specials

• To The Point
• Important Institutions
• Learning Through Maps
• PRS Capsule
• Summary Of Reports
• Gist Of Economic Survey

Study Material

• NCERT Books
• NIOS Study Material
• IGNOU Study Material
• Yojana & Kurukshetra
• Chhatisgarh
• Uttar Pradesh
• Madhya Pradesh

Test Series

• UPSC Prelims Test Series
• UPSC Mains Test Series
• UPPCS Prelims Test Series
• UPPCS Mains Test Series
• BPSC Prelims Test Series
• RAS/RTS Prelims Test Series
• Daily Editorial Analysis
• YouTube PDF Downloads
• Strategy By Toppers
• Ethics - Definition & Concepts
• Mastering Mains Answer Writing
• Places in News
• UPSC Mock Interview
• PCS Mock Interview
• Interview Insights
• Prelims 2019
• Product Promos

Drishti IAS Blog

• DEMOCRACY AND THE ROLE OF JUDICIARY

DEMOCRACY AND THE ROLE OF JUDICIARY  Blogs Home

• 09 Oct 2023

Democracy, Separation of Powers and the Judiciary

In a democracy, the Constitution reigns supreme, with the Judiciary serving as its guardian. Democracy allows people to participate in decision-making through elected representatives or direct involvement. The separation of powers divides governance into three branches: the Legislature makes laws, representing public interests; the Executive enforces laws, led by a President or Prime Minister; and the Judiciary interprets and applies laws, ensuring constitutional compliance and safeguarding rights. This separation prevents the concentration of power. In parliamentary systems like India, the Executive and Legislature are interdependent. The Judiciary acts as a vital check, upholding the Rule of Law and protecting against power abuses, ensuring a balanced democratic system.

Role of an Independent Judiciary in Democracy

India is the largest democracy in the world and any healthy democracy cannot thrive without an independent Judiciary. As a safeguard against potential violations of the Rule of Law , an independent Judiciary provides the guarantee that justice is carried out impartially. As Dr. B.B. Chawdhry writes, "Justice which is the soul of the state must be administered without fear or favour."

Various provisions have been included in the Indian Constitution to ensure an independent Judiciary. This includes the appointment of judges, salary and allowances, procedures on removal and even the power to penalise in case of violation of law.

The importance of an independent Judiciary is highlighted for various reasons. Firstly, the Judiciary serves as the first line of defence against any excessive or unauthorised power of the Executive or the Legislative branch, providing a system of checks and balances. Furthermore, the Judiciary examines and if needed, invalidates any law that violates the Indian Constitution by declaring it null & void. This prevents any centralisation of power. An impartial judicial system is essential for defending the rights of minorities & other marginalised groups in a multicultural and diversified nation like India. In addition, a strong independent Judiciary is essential to maintaining the Rule of Law. It ensures that everyone is governed by the same set of laws, irrespective of their position or power.

Judicial Review

The Judiciary has the power to review any law or executive action that it considers violating the provisions of the Constitution. This power is exercised through the process of judicial review , which is the power of the Judiciary to declare a law or executive action unconstitutional. This power of judicial review has been instrumental in shaping the Constitution of India and ensuring that the provisions of the Constitution are implemented effectively. Judicial review is adopted by the Constitution of India from the Constitution of the USA.

In India, judicial review is broad in scope and deals with a variety of issues. The Supreme Court has the power of Judicial Review in various ways, including when there is a conflict between the Centre and States, or when there is a violation of the jurisdiction exercised by the Legislature and Executive. Most importantly, the Supreme Court is the guardian of Fundamental Rights. It protects the fundamental rights of Indian citizens, through issuing various writs provided under Article 32.

Some landmark cases are as follows;

• Keshavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973)

An important turning point in Indian constitutional history was highlighted by this landmark case when the Supreme Court established the "basic structure doctrine." The Court ruled that although Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, it cannot change its basic structure. This historic decision outlined basic principles that serve as the cornerstone of Indian constitutionalism.

• Indira Gandhi vs. Raj Narain (1975)

In this instance, the Supreme Court rendered a significant decision that made the proclamation of an emergency in India unlawful. The Court's ruling upheld the fundamental idea that nobody- not even the Prime Minister is above the law and the Constitution.

• Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978)

By emphasising that any law denying a person their life or personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable, this case broadened the definition of personal liberty. It developed the idea of "procedure established by law" under Article 21, to ensure that any procedure established by law must be fair and just.

• Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan (1997)

This significant case involved workplace sexual harassment and prompted the creation of guidelines (known as the Vishaka guidelines) to address and avoid it. Through this ruling, the Court closed a gap in the law and set the stage for legislation to deal with workplace harassment.

• Union of India v. Navtej Singh Johar (2018)

By invalidating Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code , which classified homosexuality as a crime and described it as ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’, the Supreme Court in this case decriminalised homosexuality. The ruling marked a key turning point in the acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community's rights.

Judicial Activism and PIL

Judicial Activism, born in the United States, empowers the judiciary to proactively protect citizens' rights by going beyond rigid interpretations of laws or the Constitution. It bridges legislative gaps, ensuring the safeguarding of fundamental rights when the legislature falls short. It adapts legal principles to evolving societal needs and acts as a check on executive authority, preventing overreach. This activism defends democracy, minorities, and marginalized groups while promoting equality, social justice, and good governance.

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India empowers citizens to address issues affecting the public at large, not just individually. The judiciary has actively used PILs to champion environmental protection, sustainable development, and wildlife preservation. It has been instrumental in upholding individual liberties, including the right to privacy, freedom of speech, and combating discrimination. Landmark judgments have also advanced education, women's rights, and decriminalized homosexuality, leading to significant social change.

• Judicial Activism vs. Separation of Powers: Critics argue that Judicial Activism could weaken the separation of powers, leading to Judicial Overreach when the Court obstructs the legislative and executive branches.
• Backlog of Cases: The Indian judicial system faces a significant backlog of cases, delaying justice and eroding public confidence. While some reforms have been initiated, more extensive changes are needed.
• Access to Justice: Many Indians, especially disadvantaged groups, struggle to access legal services due to factors like limited legal knowledge, financial constraints, and inadequate infrastructure. To address this, efforts are needed to enhance legal literacy, provide affordable legal assistance, and make the legal system more user-friendly.

In conclusion, the Judiciary is a crucial component of Indian democracy and plays a far larger role than simply reading the law. It is the foundation of justice, defending personal freedoms, enforcing responsibility, and supporting the Rule of Law. However, issues still exist, including the need for better accessibility and the backlog of cases. A dynamic democracy like India must keep improving its judicial system, promoting transparency, and fortifying the systems that provide justice for all. The Court will continue to flourish as a bulwark of democracy through such initiatives, directing India toward a future of justice, equality, and the preservation of democratic ideals.

Book- INDIAN CONSTITUTION AT WORK AND POLITICAL THEORY by Dr.B.B.Chawdhry

https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/important-judgements-of-independent-india

https://www.drishtiias.com/mains-practice-question/question-1555

https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/judicial-activism-restraint-overreach

Annie Pruthi

Annie Pruthi is a Master’s graduate in Political Science from Jamia Millia Islamia. She is currently working as a Research Intern at PRIDE, Lok Sabha Secretariat. She is also the co-author of the book "Will You Stay?" and the recipient of the Coimbatore Literary Awards. (2020). Her research interests include Indo-Pacific studies.

Comments (0)

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

• Who were Alexander II’s parents?
• What did Alexander II accomplish?

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• OpenStax - Introduction to Political Science - What Is the Judiciary?

Recent News

judiciary , branch of government whose task is the authoritative adjudication of controversies over the application of laws in specific situations.

Conflicts brought before the judiciary are embodied in cases involving litigants, who may be individuals, groups, legal entities (e.g., corporations), or governments and their agencies. See also constitutional law , court , and procedural law .

Conflicts that allege personal or financial harm resulting from violations of law or binding legal agreements between litigants—other than violations legally defined as crimes—produce civil cases. Judicial decisions in civil cases often require the losing or offending party to pay financial compensation to the winner. Crimes produce criminal cases, which are officially defined as conflicts between the state or its citizens and the accused (defendant) rather than as conflicts between the victim of the crime and the defendant. Judicial decisions in criminal cases determine whether the accused is guilty or not guilty. A defendant found guilty is sentenced to punishments, which may involve the payment of a fine, a term of imprisonment, or, in the most serious cases in some legal systems, state-imposed physical mutilation or even death ( see capital punishment ).

Judiciaries also frequently resolve administrative cases, disputes between individuals, groups, or legal entities and government agencies over the application of laws or the implementation of government programs. Most legal systems have incorporated the principle of state sovereignty , whereby governments may not be sued by nonstate litigants without their consent . This principle limits the right of litigants to pursue remedies against government actions. Nevertheless, the right of citizens to be free from the arbitrary, improper, abusive application of laws and government regulations has long been recognized and is the focus of administrative cases.

Legal systems differ in the extent to which their judiciaries handle civil, criminal, and administrative cases. In some, courts hear all three kinds of disputes. In others there are specialized civil, criminal, and administrative courts. Still others have some general and some specialized courts.

In many cases the conflicts that are nominally brought to courts for resolution are uncontested. The majority of civil cases—such as those involving divorce , child custody, or the interpretation of contracts —are settled out of court and never go to trial . The same is true for criminal cases in the United States , where the practice of extrajudicial plea bargaining is used extensively. The different criminal process that characterizes the United Kingdom and civil-law countries makes plea bargaining of the sort practiced in the United States less likely—or even officially impossible. Nevertheless, there is evidence that analogous practices for generating and accepting guilty pleas are common in the United Kingdom and are not unknown in Germany. In cases of plea bargaining the court’s function is administrative, limited to officially ratifying and recording the agreement the parties have reached out of court.

When the judiciary does decide a controversy, a body of regulations governs what parties are allowed before the court, what evidence will be admitted, what trial procedure will be followed, and what types of judgments may be rendered. Judicial proceedings involve the participation of a number of people. Although the judge is the central figure, along with the parties to the controversy and the lawyers who represent them, there are other individuals involved, including witnesses , clerks, bailiffs, administrators, and jurors when the proceeding involves a jury .

The stated function of the courts is the authoritative adjudication of controversies over the application of laws in specific situations. However, it is unavoidable that courts also make law and public policy, because judges must exercise at least some measure of discretion in deciding which litigant claims are legally correct or otherwise most appropriate. Lawmaking and policy making by courts are most evident when powerful national supreme courts (e.g., those in the United States, Germany, and India) exercise their power of judicial review to hold laws or major government actions unconstitutional. They also can occur, however, when judiciaries are behaving as administrators, even when they are merely ratifying agreements reached out of court. Patterns of settlement for suits between employers and employees may be more favourable to employees than formal law would seem to require, because they are influenced by de facto changes in the law that may result from the decisions by juries or trial judges who may regularly be more sympathetic to workers. Formal laws regulating child custody or financial settlements in divorce cases can similarly be altered over time as juries process the claims of the litigants before them in persistent ways.

After a court decision has been made, it may or may not require enforcement. In many cases the parties accept the judgment of the court and conform their behaviour to it. In other cases a court must order a party to cease a particular activity. The enforcement of such orders is carried out by the executive branch and may require funding from the legislative branch. The judiciary has been described as the least-dangerous branch of government because it has “neither the purse nor the sword,” but, in reality, enforcement of the orders of any government institution depends on the enforcing institution’s acceptance of the issuing institution’s right to make the ruling and to have it enforced.

Your Article Library

Judiciary: functions, importance and an essential quality of judiciary.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The Judiciary is the third organ of the government. It has the responsibility to apply the laws to specific cases and settle all disputes. The real ‘meaning of law’ is what the judges decide during the course of giving their judgements in various cases. From the citizen’s point of view, Judiciary is the most important organ of the government because it acts as their protector against the possible excesses of legislative and executive organs. Role of Judiciary as the guardian-protector of the constitution and the fundamental rights of the people makes it more respectable than other two organs.

Functions of Judiciary and Its Importance:

1. To Give Justice to the people:

The first and foremost function of the judiciary is to give justice to the people, whenever they may approach it. It awards punishment to those who after trial are found guilty of violating the laws of the state or the rights of the people.

The aggrieved citizens can go to the courts for seeking redress and compensation. They can do so either when they fear any harm to their rights or after they have suffered any loss. The judiciary fixes the quantity and quality of punishment to be given to the criminals. It decides all cases involving grant of compensations to the citizens.

2. Interpretation and Application of Laws:

One of the major functions of the judiciary is to interpret and apply laws to specific cases. In the course of deciding the disputes that come before it, the judges interpret and apply laws. Every law needs a proper interpretation for getting applied to every specific case. This function is performed by the judges. The law means what the judges interpret it to mean.

3. Role in Law-making:

The judiciary also plays a role in law-making. The decisions given by the courts really determine the meaning, nature and scope of the laws passed by the legislature. The interpretation of laws by the judiciary amounts to law-making as it is these interpretations which really define the laws.

Moreover, ‘the judgements delivered by the higher courts, which are the Courts of Records, are binding upon lower courts. The latter can decide the cases before them on the basis of the decisions made by the higher courts. Judicial decisions constitute a source of law.

4. Equity Legislation:

Where a law is silent or ambiguous, or appears to be inconsistent with some other law of the land, the judges depend upon their sense of justice, fairness, impartiality, honesty and wisdom for deciding the cases. Such decisions always involve law-making. It is usually termed as equity legislation.

5. Protection of Rights:

The judiciary has the supreme responsibility to safeguard the rights of the people. A citizen has the right to seek the protection of the judiciary in case his rights are violated or threatened to be violated by the government or by private organisations or fellow citizens. In all such cases, it becomes the responsibility of the judiciary to protect his rights of the people.

6. Guardian of the Constitution:

The judiciary acts as the guardian of the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to interpret and protect it. For this purpose the judiciary can conduct judicial review over any law for determining as to whether or not it is in accordance with the letter and spirit of the constitution. In case any law is found ultra vires (unconstitutional), it is rejected by the judiciary and it becomes invalid for future. This power of the court is called the power of judicial review.

7. Power to get its Decisions and Judgements enforced:

The judiciary has the power not only to deliver judgements and decide disputes, but also to get these enforced. It can direct the executive to carry out its decisions. It can summon any person and directly know the truth from him.

In case any person is held:

(i) Guilty of not following any decision of the court, or

(ii) Of acting against the direction of the court, or

(iii) Misleading the court, or

(iv) Of not appearing before the court in a case being heard by it, the Court has the power to punish the person for the contempt of court.

8. Special Role in a Federation:

In a federal system, the judiciary has to perform an additionally important role as the guardian of the constitution and the arbiter of disputes between the centre and states. It acts as an independent and impartial umpire between the central government and state governments as well as among the states. All legal centre-state disputes are settled by the judiciary.

9. Running of the Judicial Administration:

The judiciary is not a department of the government. It is independent of both the legislature and the executive. It is a separate and independent organ with its own organisation and officials. It has the power to decide the nature of judicial organisation in the state. It frames and enforces its own rules.

These govern the recruitment and working of the magistrates and other persons working in the courts. It makes and enforces rules for the orderly and efficient conduct of judicial administration.

10. Advisory Functions:

Very often the courts are given the responsibility to give advisory opinions to the rulers on any legal matter. For example, the President of India the power to refer to the Supreme Court any question of law or fact which is of public importance.

11. To Conduct Judicial Inquiries:

Judges are very often called upon to head Enquiry Commissions constituted to enquire into some serious incidents resulting from the alleged errors or omissions on the part of government or some public servants. Commissions of enquiry headed by a single judge are also sometimes constituted for investigating important and complicated issues and problems.

12. Miscellaneous Functions:

Besides the above major functions, the judiciary also performs several other functions. Some such functions are the appointment of certain local officials of the court, choosing of clerical and other employees. Cases relating to grant of licenses, patents, and copy rights, the appointment of guardians and trustees, the admission of wills, to appoint trustees to look after the property of the minors, to settle the issues of successions of property and rights, issue of administrating the estates of deceased persons, the appointment of receivers, naturalization of aliens, marriage and divorce cases, election petitions and the like.

Through all these functions, the Judiciary plays an important role in each state. It also plays a role in the evolution of Constitution through the exercise of its right to interpret and safeguard it against all legislative and executive excesses.

Importance of Independent Judiciary:

In the life of the citizens of a state, Judiciary is a source of confidence and fearlessness. The common man depends upon judiciary for getting justice. Without a security of rights and freedom guaranteed by the judiciary, they cannot really hope to carry out their jobs and enjoy their living. They are more dependent upon judiciary than the legislature and the executive. Without judicial protection, their lives can become miserable. From citizens point of view Judiciary is the most important organ of the government.

Garner highlights this view when he observes, “A society without legislature is conceivable, and indeed, legislative organs did not make their appearance in the state until modern times, but a civilised state without a judicial organ and machinery is hardly conceivable.”

Judiciary enjoys a big importance in the eyes of the people because it acts as:

(1) The dispenser of Justice.

(2) Protector of the rights of the people.

(3) Guardian protector of the Constitution of the State.

(4) Arbiter of center-state disputes.

(5) Safeguard against Legislative and executive excesses.

(6) Check against arbitrary exercise of powers by the power-holders.

(7) Guardian of Rule of Law and Justice.

An independent judiciary is always considered to be the most essential part of every democratic government worth its name. A government without judiciary is almost inconceivable. A government without independent judiciary is always held to be an authoritarian government.

Independence of Judiciary: An Essential Quality:

The chief quality which helps the judiciary to faithfully administer justice and to perform its functions efficiently is judicial independence. It is only when the judiciary works independently without any interference of the other two organs of the government that it can carry out its high responsibilities.

“The independence of judiciary,” writes Dr. P. Sharan, “is a corner stone of every democratic government and upon it is built the structure of civil liberty.” Judiciary can perform its functions only when it is free to administer justice according to law. Without being well-organised and independent it can never serve its purpose. Therefore, Judiciary must be organised in such a way as can enable the judges to give their judgements without any fear or favour.

Organisation of Judiciary must be based on the following features:

(1) Appointment of only highly qualified and experienced judges.

(2) The Judiciary must have prevented the executive and legislature from committing excesses.

(3) The ability of the judiciary to maintain and independently run the judicial administration.

(4) The Judiciary must be made the guardian protector of the Constitution,

(5) The Judiciary must ensure full, fair and less- expensive opportunities to the people for defending their rights and getting justice.

(6) The method of appointment of judges must be fair, systematic, effective and transparent.

(7) Method of removal of judges should be difficult and no single should have the power to remove the judges.

(8) Judges must be paid high salaries, necessary allowances, good service conditions, and appropriate retirement benefits.

By incorporating all these features in the judicial system, a well organised and independent judiciary can be secured.

Related Articles:

• Judiciary in India: 11 Salient Features of Indian Judiciary
• 9 Silent Features of the Russian Judiciary System

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Judicial System: the Role of Judges Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

The role of judges.

Judges are very important people in the society since they solve cases that determine the next phase of a person’s life. Thus, they require various people who they can trust and work within the judicial system. The judiciary is an independent entity, but as is always the case, each entity needs help from other sources (Boyea, 2013).

The judiciary has to build its internal relationships to ensure smooth running of the judicial system. These internal relationships are important and relevant to each of the courts. The level of its independence and interdependence on other systems determine whether the judge’s work is effective or not.

A judge refers to an individual who is authorized and qualified to make a decision. A judge is a public officer to the court making judgments on the legal lawsuits based on either the substantive or procedural bylaws. In the U.S court system, a magistrate presides over the proceedings taking place in the courtrooms. In fact, judges have no authority to carry out investigations, but they can authorize an investigation to be carried out.

The commonly known kinds of magistrates in the U.S court system are the appellate as well as the trial law-court juries. A trial court judge often controls the trials from the beginning to the end (Stephenson, 2013). They take part in all details of the case including but not limited to setting the trial schedule, giving advice to the jury, and sentencing a guilty defendant.

The appellate judge hears appeals from the trial courts, reviews them, and decides whether there was injustice or not. Judges work in different courtrooms and listen to cases of diverse types and are either elected or appointed. Judges have to be of good behavior at all times since they must adhere to ethical rules.

The juries may only hold office when these ethical rules are followed to the latter. A jury may be removed from office through impeachment, and this only occurs when there is a violation of ethical or legal rules. The judges have to be impartial (Swanson, 2011). They have to make their ruling without being biased.

The judge has various roles both inside and outside the courtroom. The juries play a significant role in controlling public morality. In the U.S court system, judges rule on issues that affect each citizen. Judges listen to allegations brought by the prosecutors, the attorney defenders, and the testimony of the witnesses and rule whether the evidence is valid or not.

Judges then give instructions to the jury on how to apply both the procedural and substantive laws and standards in the case (Boyea, 2013). Judges also have the task of asking the witnesses questions and finally rule on the cases presented. Magistrates are mandated to make decisions regarding the crime and issue verdicts on the case based on the available evidence.

In most cases, the law is interpreted with the aid of judges. They find out various laws, regulations, and explain them to the public. Judges also see that other court staffs do their work according to the U.S court system. Besides, judges set meetings with attorneys of the opposing parties to discuss various cases and find a way out probably by encouraging a settlement.

Finally, judges are mandated to set up the rules and procedures of the court (Swanson, 2011). They control how the court proceedings take place and ensure that there is order during the court session by both parties and the witnesses. Often, this is to make sure that there is a fair trial in the court.

An independent judiciary is important in a democratic government. It creates a sense of trust for the citizens knowing that they will get justice fairly. Thus, as is the case in the U.S court system, judges have to be independent of the government. Judges should be free to make their decisions without facing pressure or interference from other sources. Though independent, the juries use information from other personnel to ensure that the court proceedings run smoothly, and cases are ruled fairly.

The courthouse personnel include the legal officer, the suspect’s defense advocate, and the prosecuting attorney. These three personnel have a great relationship given that they use other personnel to offer effective court proceedings. These interdependent relationships ensure that the external relationships are maintained, and there is peace in the criminal justice system (Stephenson, 2013). The personnel also help judges by doing what the judges cannot do for themselves.

The prosecutors help by investigating and finding evidence of the suspected crimes. If the prosecutors do not do their job well, impunity is bound to take place in the society. The other personnel include court representative or steward, court administrator, the correspondent and the suspect. The law court representative offers security to the courthouse while the administrator is the office worker when courtroom procedures happen.

The court correspondent archives what happens throughout the hearing sessions. All these people have their area of expertise with different bases of powers. They all do their work with a common goal of administering justice.

Hence, this helps maintain group togetherness and reduce irregularities when applying both the procedural and substantive laws (Boyea, 2013). These relationships lead to good working relationships, which consequently lead to better negotiations. It determines how the courtroom personnel relate with each other during court proceedings.

In conclusion, the ethical and legal standards applicable in the criminal judicial systems help in upholding the relationships that are important for the judges to offer fair trials. During court sessions, the juries need to concentrate on the cases at hand and delegate some duties to others. Therefore, they need each personnel of the courtroom.

Boyea, B. (2013). Reflecting on the role of state judges. Judicature , 97 (3): 153-155.

Stephenson, D. (2013). The judicial bookshelf. Journal of Supreme Court History , 38 (3): 438-454.

Swanson, R. (2011). Judicial roles in state high courts. Judicature , 94 (4): 150-168.

• Human Rights Violations in Chile
• Can Judicial Review Be Reconciled With Democracy?
• Courtroom Participants’ Professional Standards
• The Courtroom and the Courthouse Professionals
• The Courtroom in the Digital Age
• Martha Stewart case analysis
• Law: Civil Procedure Hypos
• Moving Beyond Simple Conflict of Interest
• A brief summation of the rulings
• Effective Public Defender System
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, March 26). Judicial System: the Role of Judges. https://ivypanda.com/essays/judicial-system-the-role-of-judges/

"Judicial System: the Role of Judges." IvyPanda , 26 Mar. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/judicial-system-the-role-of-judges/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Judicial System: the Role of Judges'. 26 March.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Judicial System: the Role of Judges." March 26, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/judicial-system-the-role-of-judges/.

1. IvyPanda . "Judicial System: the Role of Judges." March 26, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/judicial-system-the-role-of-judges/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Judicial System: the Role of Judges." March 26, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/judicial-system-the-role-of-judges/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — Democracy — The Role of Judiciary in the Liberal Democracy

The Role of Judiciary in The Liberal Democracy

• Categories: Democracy

About this sample

Words: 731 |

Published: Sep 12, 2018

Words: 731 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Government & Politics

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2173 words

3 pages / 1300 words

2 pages / 1081 words

3 pages / 1261 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

From the establishment of the first colonies in America, the early colonial government policies laid the foundation for the political system that continues to shape the United States today. This essay will explore the lasting [...]

Since the birth of modern democratic states, federalism has played a crucial role in distributing power between central and regional governments, promoting diversity and autonomy, and allowing for checks and balances. This essay [...]

Pluralism and majoritarianism are two contrasting models of democratic governance that have been the subject of much debate and discussion in the field of political science. While both systems aim to represent the will of the [...]

While democratic political systems offer numerous advantages, it is crucial to acknowledge and address their drawbacks for the sake of continuous improvement. The tyranny of the majority, political polarization and gridlock, the [...]

A functioning democracy is defined by various characteristics, like freedom of speech, equality, human rights, rule of law and many more. When autocratic rulers or monarchs were in power these achievements of modern society [...]

According to Max Weber (1968), legitimacy is power in which its acquisition and exercise conforms to established law, power which interprets legal rules and is rational. As such it emphasizes rule of law, constitutionalism and [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

11.1 What Is the Judiciary?

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Distinguish between rule of law and rule by law.
• Identify the responsibilities of a judicial system.
• Compare and contrast the different methods states and countries use to select judicial officers.
• Discuss major criticisms of each method of judicial selection.

In Chapter 4: Civil Liberties , you learned that law is a body of rules of conduct, with binding legal force and effect, that is prescribed, recognized, and enforced by a controlling authority. In the world today, that authority is usually the government of a particular area. However, multiple levels of government may have authority in a given place. The power of a governmental body to exercise the highest authority in an area is called sovereignty . If a government has sovereignty over a particular region, that government can create and impose rules on people within the region.

Chapter 4: Civil Liberties also introduced the rule of law , the principle that the government is beholden to its laws, not to any individual or group. Throughout history, many individuals and small groups have become dictators with the sole power to create laws and punish people as they wished, thus employing rule by law . There are still some dictators in the world today, as in North Korea . Dictatorships are oppressive, and dictatorial regimes are prone to corruption. By following the rule of law, robust democracies try to avoid these injustices.

Court Shorts: Rule of Law

In this brief video, United States judges who preside over different types and levels of courts discuss the meaning of the rule of law and the role it plays in our everyday lives.

Recall the four principles of the rule of law:

• Accountability: The government and private actors are accountable under the law. No one is above the law.
• Just laws: The laws are clear, publicized, stable, and applied evenly, and they protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property and certain core human rights.
• Open government: The processes by which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforced are accessible, fair, and efficient.
• Accessible and impartial dispute resolution: Justice is delivered in a timely manner by competent, ethical, independent, and neutral decision-makers who have adequate resources and reflect the communities they serve.

These principles demonstrate that the government and the people are in a social contract , a voluntary agreement whereby the people consent to abide by specific rules while living in the territory and the government consents to limit itself to acting in accordance with certain standards. This creates a symbiotic relationship between the government and the people, rather than a system based on fear and oppression.

In each democratic country, a constitution sets up the framework for government operations that adhere to these four principles. The constitution formalizes how the country’s government will wield authority and implement powers under that authority. The constitution may be written or unwritten, in one document or several, and titled constitution or basic laws . Whatever its form or title, a constitution establishes the basic government structure for the government’s sovereign territory. It usually creates branches with differing powers that have the ability to check each other in the exercise of those powers. One of the branches that carries out the rule of law in a country is the judicial branch.

The judicial system or judicial branch is the court system that interprets, defends, and applies the law in the government’s name. It is the mechanism for peacefully resolving disputes between individuals. Sometimes people refer to this branch of government as the judiciary, but that can be confusing because the judiciary also refers to the people who work in the judicial branch. Therefore, this chapter will consistently refer to the branch of government as the judicial branch and the people who work in that branch as the judiciary.

The judicial branch serves different purposes in different political systems. For example, in a political system that prioritizes civil rights and liberties, the judiciary working within the judicial branch checks government action and protects individual rights and liberties. In a system in which there is a separation of powers between the branches of government, the judiciary has judicial independence . In these systems, often the courts can perform a judicial review to check government actions. In judicial review , a judge interprets and implements the constitution to ensure that the other branches of government do not violate what it says. Judicial review will be explored later in this chapter.

In contrast, some political systems rely on adherence to strict religious or political standards, creating authoritarian law regimes. In these systems, the judicial branch and the judiciary help impose the government’s approved viewpoint on the citizens through rule by law . In these systems, the judiciary has little independence. The judicial system acts as a source of government control over individual citizens. 3 Tom Ginsburg and Tamir Moustafa identify five primary functions of courts in these authoritarian rule-by-law regimes:

• To establish social control and sideline political opponents
• To bolster a regime’s claim to legal legitimacy
• To strengthen administrative compliance within the state’s own bureaucratic machinery and solve coordination problems among competing factions within the regime
• To facilitate trade and investment
• To implement controversial policies so as to allow political distance from core elements of the regime 4

Justice Handed Over to Dictatorship from the Film Judgment at Nuremberg

The 1961 film Judgment at Nuremberg portrays the military tribunal at which four German judges who served while the Nazis were in power face charges of crimes against humanity. In this clip, the former minister of justice explains changes in the judiciary under the dictatorship of the Third Reich.

In rule-by-law authoritarian regimes, the government suppresses opposition and imposes a specific viewpoint on any part of the government or the population to the extent that human rights violations occur. 5 Iran and North Korea are examples of rule-by-law authoritarian regimes. The dictatorial leader of North Korea is selected to a lifetime appointment on a state-approved ballot where only one candidate is listed. This leader has control over the judiciary, and all must adhere to the leader’s will or face retribution. 6

Other countries have come to have an authoritarian-populist judiciary . This means that, through changes instituted by one ruling person or political party, they have transitioned from a rule-of-law system to a rule-by-law authoritarian subsystem. In Turkey, longtime president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his ruling party replaced the governmental system in 2017 and have enacted laws to keep themselves in power. Changes in 2007, 2010, and 2017 gave Erdoğan and his ruling party the ability to appoint and dismiss prosecutors and judges, thus calling into question the independence of the judiciary. 7 A European Commission report in 2020 found that the continued centralization of power in the president was blurring the lines of separation of powers in the branches of government such that few checks and balances remain: “Under these conditions, the serious backsliding of the respect for democratic standards, the rule of law, and fundamental freedoms continued.” 8 The report identified significant issues with the Turkish judicial system and its slide into rule by law, not the rule of law:

“Turkey’s judicial system is at an early stage of preparation and serious backsliding continued during the reporting period. Concerns remained, in particular over the systemic lack of independence of the judiciary. The president announced the Judicial Reform Strategy for 2019–2023 in May 2019. However, it falls short of addressing key shortcomings regarding the independence of the judiciary. No measures were announced to remedy the concerns identified by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission and in the European Commission’s annual country reports. There are concerns that dismissals in the absence of respect for due procedures caused self-censorship and intimidation within the judiciary. No measures were taken to change the structure of, and process for, the selection of members of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors to strengthen its independence. Concerns regarding the lack of objective, merit-based, uniform and pre-established criteria for recruiting and promoting judges and prosecutors persisted. No changes were made to the institution of criminal judges of peace so that concerns regarding their jurisdiction and practice remained.” 9

One can thus see the difference between the rule of law and rule by law. Each judicial system can be assessed on the basis of how well it meets the rule-of-law criteria for protecting the rights of the people from government overreach, manipulation, and the rise of dictatorships.

How the Judicial Branch Differs from the Other Branches of Government

Judicial branches differ from the executive and legislative branches because, unlike in those branches, the judicial system restricts how the courts may act and how the people may express their opinions to the courts. A good description of this restriction appears in Federalist no. 78, wherein Alexander Hamilton wrote about the judicial branch as it is described in the US Constitution:

“Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but also holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but also prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatsoever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.” 10

In rule-of-law systems, the judicial branch depends on the other branches and the population’s respect for the rule of law to carry out its decisions. An example helps illustrate the differences between the branches and their powers. In the United States, a president alarmed at the number of gun shootings occurring in the country can create a commission to review the problem and make recommendations to Congress to enact new laws. The president (the executive) can implement some of these recommendations by executive order , a particular type of binding law that only the chief executive can create. The people can express their views on the subject to the president at any time. Congress (the legislature) may also be alarmed about the number of gun killings. They can open an investigation and create a statute to limit some access to guns. Again, the people can express their views on this subject to Congress at any time. In both examples, government officials decide what they want to investigate and what actions they want to take, and the people can freely voice their opinions on the subject. Courts, however, cannot take action on their own in the ways the executive and legislative branches can, and people cannot express their opinion in court unless they meet particular criteria. A court can only take action if it has jurisdiction over a specific case. Jurisdiction is the written authority, stated in a constitution or a statute, that authorizes a court to hear a case. Jurisdiction includes both the geographical region and the topics of the court’s authority.

What Can I Do?

Critical thinking and the courts.

Every functioning government must have a functioning judicial system. As you study the different forms of judicial systems, how they operate, and elements such as the standards of evidence across different judicial systems, as well as different types of law, you are sharpening your critical thinking skills. Being able to understand and explain why someone is found innocent of a particular crime, for example, requires the ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize various pieces of information coming from the defense attorney, the prosecutor, the facts of the case, and the components of the law in question. This is the core of critical thinking, and it is a fundamental skill that is utilized in virtually any career. Critical thinking skills are highly valued, and they take work and practice to develop. Studying topics such as courts and judiciary systems is a good way not only to prepare for a career within the legal world—as an attorney, for example—but also to hone general critical thinking skills that are invaluable regardless of what direction your professional path in life takes.

Selecting Judicial Officers

There are as many ways to select judicial officers as there are countries in the world. The particulars of the selection process vary widely by country. The selection process can also differ for different levels or types of courts within a country. All of the selection processes can be sorted into four broad categories:

• Appointment for life
• Appointment for a specified number of years
• Hybrid, or a combination of these methods (e.g., appointment followed by retention election)

Lifetime Appointments

The US Constitution establishes a Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) and authorizes Congress to create other Article III courts . 11 The judges for these courts are nominated by the president and confirmed by the US Senate. These Article III judges serve for life, as long as they remain on “good behavior.” There is no mandatory retirement age. These courts have the power of judicial review and, once appointed, are independent of the other branches of government.

Congress can change any court’s jurisdiction except SCOTUS’s original jurisdiction . Still, neither Congress nor the president can fire a judge nor stop the judge’s salary if they disagree with a decision the judge makes. Thus, the judiciary in the United States has some measure of independence, but judges are often subject to political pressure during the appointment process.

Article III courts include the United States Supreme Court, US circuit courts of appeals , and US district courts . There is only one SCOTUS, but there are 13 circuit courts of appeals and about 100 district courts. All have multiple judges, so the power to appoint judges is a substantial one. Moreover, because these judges are appointed for life, a president can influence the interpretation of the law and the Constitution well beyond that president’s term of office. As noted by legal scholar Alexander Bickel , “You shoot an arrow into a far distant future when you appoint a [US federal] justice, and not the man himself can tell you what he will think about some of the problems that he will face.” 12

THE CHANGING POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

Women on high courts around the world.

While gender representation on high court benches across the globe skews toward men, studies suggest that the rate of women on judiciaries in countries around the world rose by about 29 percent between 2011 and 2019. Research suggests that a high court judge’s gender may be a better predictor of how they will decide a case than their political leanings and that the gender composition of a court can influence how individual judges view a case. 13

Ethiopia’s First Female Supreme Court Chief Justice: Meaza Ashenafi

In this clip, Meaza Ashenafi, the first ever female Chief Justice on Ethiopia's Supreme Court, talks about how she worked to define sexual harassment and violence against women in the Amharic language, the official language of Ethiopia. She goes on to discuss the importance of the impartiality of the courts and the role courts play in serving their communities.

The lifetime appointment of judges outside the United States is rare. Even in countries that say they appoint certain judges to lifetime terms, these judges are held to a mandatory retirement age. 14 For example, in the United Kingdom, Supreme Court justices are not subject to term limits , but they must retire by age 70. 15 Additionally, in the United Kingdom, there are minimum requirements for nomination, and a nominating commission reviews applicants. Finally, this type of appointment applies only to a particular court, not to all courts in a broad category, as in the United States.

In Belgium, the monarch appoints constitutional court judges from a list of candidates submitted by Parliament. 16 As in the UK, these judges are appointed for life with mandatory retirement at age 70. The monarch selects judges for the supreme court, the Court of Cassation, from candidates submitted by the High Council of Justice, an independent 44-member body consisting of both judicial and nonjudicial members. Like constitutional court judges, Court of Cassation judges are appointed for life with a mandatory retirement age of 70. 17

Recent discussions in the United States have debated instating a mandatory retirement age or setting a term limit for Article III judges. 18

Appointment for a Term of Years

There is a second type of US federal judge: those appointed for a term of years. Congress, in creating these courts, specifies the qualifications of the judge and the term of service. 19 Potential judges apply for the office as one would apply for any other job. A hiring committee selects the judge. Several US states also appoint some of their judges for a term of years. The process for an appointment varies by state. 20

Many countries appoint some of their judges for a term of years, though the processes by which they do so differ. 21 For example, in Albania, the president alone makes some nine-year appointments. 22 On the other hand, the Chinese legislature, the People’s National Congress, appoints the chief justice of their national supreme court for a limit of two consecutive five-year terms. 23 To be considered for most judicial appointments in France, an attorney must pass a series of entrance examinations. 24 They must then attend special classes and pass a series of difficult examinations to be eligible for an appointment as a judge. The Ministry of Justice oversees this process without any executive input.

Appointment by Election

A few US states use a rare process, election, to select some judges. In a 1988 speech, Hans Linde , a former justice of the Oregon Supreme Court, said “To the rest of the world, American adherence to judicial elections is as incomprehensible as our rejection of the metric system.” 25

When judges are directly elected, the judiciary is an agent of the government with limited independence. The voters use their votes to pass judgment on judicial decisions in the same way that they use their votes to weigh in on the actions of the executive and legislative branches. Thus, one of the criticisms of judicial elections is that they incentivize judges to make politically popular decisions that are not necessarily correct interpretations of the law.

Different US states employ different types of judicial elections. A candidate’s political party is listed on the ballot in partisan elections , while the candidate’s political affiliation is not listed in nonpartisan elections . Many states have moved away from direct elections and toward retention elections. In a retention election , a judge is appointed for a term of years, and at the end of that term, an election is held to determine if the judge should be retained for another term or replaced. 26

Texas is one of the few states that still holds partisan elections for almost all judgeships in the state. 27 As a result, candidates run for office just like all other elected officials. They align with a political party, receive the majority vote in the party’s primary election, and campaign showing their affiliation to the party. Most other states have moved away from this selection style because of issues with partisanship, such as the appearance of impropriety when someone makes a large campaign contribution before appearing before the court and the instability of a process that selects candidates based on political popularity rather than legal expertise. 28 Texas has been the object of scrutiny for allegations of favoritism to campaign donors and political party influence on judges. 29 As a result, there is pressure from a number of corners, including former and current judges, to change this system. 30 About 13 states still hold nonpartisan elections for some of their judgeships. These states assert that this enables people to have a say in the judiciary while removing political partisanship from the selection process. 31

Former Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court Wallace Jefferson on Electing Judges in Texas

In this clip, former Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court Wallace Jefferson weighs in on how he believes the state of Texas should select judges.

Switzerland also holds judicial elections in which the Federal Assembly, their legislative branch, elects judges to six-year terms. 32 A few other countries also hold some judicial elections.

Hybrid or Mixed Selection

Many countries have a hybrid system , with a mix of appointments for term and appointments for life depending on the type of court. 33 A couple of countries and a few US states have both appointments and elections. One common hybrid selection system used in several countries is an appointment with review after one term. In Japan, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is designated by the Cabinet and appointed by the monarch, while associate justices are appointed by the Cabinet and confirmed by the monarch. All justices are subject to a popular referendum at the first general election after their appointment and every 10 years thereafter. 34

Several US states use a hybrid system known as retention or the Missouri Plan . This system has gained popularity in the United States over the last 50 years. 35 In a retention system, the executive initially appoints a judge, with legislative approval, similar to the federal appointment process. The appointed person serves for a term of years. After this initial term, if a judge wants to remain in office, they must run in a retention election. There is no opposing candidate in a retention election; people vote on whether to keep or replace the judge. The judge runs on their record, and their party affiliation typically is not listed on the ballot. A retained judge remains in office for another term. In some states, there is a limit to the number of retention terms a judge may serve. If the judge is not retained, then the process starts again with new nominees and appointments. This style appeals to many Americans because it limits campaigning and political party influence over the judiciary while allowing the people some say over the judicial officers.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-political-science/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Mark Carl Rom, Masaki Hidaka, Rachel Bzostek Walker
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Political Science
• Publication date: May 18, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-political-science/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-political-science/pages/11-1-what-is-the-judiciary

© Apr 26, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.