Introduction
The judicial system plays a very important role in the protection of the rights and freedoms of the individuals in a country. The courts play a major role in ensuring that the victims or potential victims of injustices can obtain effective remedies. The courts also ensure that the people who are suspected of having committed criminal offenses receive a fair trial, which conforms to international standards and the laws of the country in question. The decisions that the lawyers, judges, and court officials take usually have far-reaching effects on other people. The conduct of the members of the judiciary should therefore be good to enable them to administer justice effectively. To this end, the perception of the members of the public is very important. Moreover, members of the public should have a good perception of the members of the judiciary, as failure to do so may result in a decrease in confidence in the judicial system.
Accountability
Accountability is defined as the responsibility due to the relationship between two or more people where one person delegates the task whereas the other party is a recipient of the task (Prenzler, 2009, p. 9). The criminal justice system is part of the government as it ensures that the laws set are applied effectively. The criminal justice system can therefore be said to form part of the political system of the government and society. Therefore, just like the politicians and the government which is accountable to the citizens of the country, the judicial system is accountable to the citizens. The judicial system must ensure that the actions they take are for the general good of the members of society. Politicians are generally elected by the citizens of the country, however, they transfer the implementation of the laws they pass to the judicial system (Prenzler, 2009, p. 11).
Politicians are usually elected by the citizens; therefore, they are accountable to them. Should their actions fail to impress the citizens, then the citizens can hold them accountable. However, the members of the judiciary are not usually elected. Therefore the question of who they’re accountable to comes up. In some countries such as the US, the members of the judiciary are usually elected hence, the public is able to hold the judges accountable (Kleinig, 2008, p. 173). The members of the judicial system are not usually elected by the people except in very few countries such as the United States. The judicial system is also accountable to the politicians who are the ones who delegate the work to them.
Accountability of the members of the judiciary enables them to overcome some of the ethical issues, which they may be faced in the practice of their work. The ethical issues, which the members of the judiciary may be faced with, are usually varied and may have far-reaching effects on the other parties or the administration of justice.
Accountability mechanisms
To ensure that the various members of the judiciary are accountable there are various accountability mechanisms which are have been set up. This paper will discuss the different accountability mechanisms, as well as they, are used to maximize ethical conduct and prevent misconduct.
Conflict of interest and disqualification
Any member of the judiciary, including other holders of public office in most countries, is prohibited from improperly using official author for their own or family financial interest. The members of the judiciary are prohibited from engaging in activities that are not compatible with the functions and duties in the public office (Prenzler, 2009, p. 117).
In fact, in England, the judges are not supposed to have any other form of employment, which will give financial remuneration except being authors for which they can receive the royalties for their publications (PIMS, 2007, p. 14). Australia on the other hand specifies that the judges should not be directors of public companies. The judges should resign from their directorship positions after the appointment and thereafter they should not accept any directorship role in public companies. In addition, the judges should not be involved in any business or financial dealing, which may be perceived to exploit the judge’s judicial position (PIMS, 2007, p. 15).
The lack of involvement of the members of the judiciary in other companies for financial gain ensures that non-partisan judgment may be passed in case the members of that company or the company itself is brought to court to face different charges with the members of the judge overseeing the case.
Disclosure of assets
In the performance of their duties, the members of the judiciary are usually faced with different people, some of who are extremely wealthy. These people may try to use their wealth to influence the judgment passed by the courts to be favorable to them. These people may therefore attempt to bribe the court officials to pass biased judgment. However, public officials including members of the judiciary, of most countries are required to disclose their assets or liabilities. These officials are also required to disclose the assets of their spouses or even dependants (Prenzler, 2009, p. 18). This prevents the officials from accumulating their wealth by benefiting from the public offices through corruption.
Confidentiality of the information
The judges and other members of the judiciary are supposed to maintain the confidentiality of the information, which they have. The only exception is if the legislation of the country requires the officials to disclose the information or the performance of their duties or the needs for the application of justice the information must be disclosed (Prenzler, 2009, p. 18). The lawyers must also ensure the confidentiality of the information, which their client gives them. However, the lawyers may be faced with an ethical dilemma if their clients provide them with information that is crucial to the administration of justice that may make their client lose the case the lawyers are engaged in.
Political activity
The members of the judiciary are not supposed to engage in political activity that is outside the scope of their office. The members of the judiciary should not be engaged in the political activities, which may be deemed by the members of the public to impair the judgment made by the judges and hence lead to a decrease in the confidence of the judge by the members of the public (Prenzler, 2009, p 18). The political activity of the judges and other members of the judiciary is restricted, as they may be perceived to favor their political friends when the parties come before them in a court of law. However, in some countries such as the United States, the judges are elected by the members of the public. These judges usually engage in campaigns to solicit votes from the members of the public. The judges are therefore engaged in the political activities since they are affiliated with a certain political party to enable their candidacy to be pleasant to the public view (Baraud, 2007, p. 1).
Autonomy
In order for the judicial system to work effectively, it must be autonomous from the other arms of the government. The judicial system must be able to regulate itself and avoid external interference by the other arms of the government. The autonomy of the judicial system enables the judges the pass the judgment without having to be influenced by other external factors. The judgment made by the judge is purely made on his understanding of the law (International Commission of Jurists, 2007, p. 158). The lack of external interference enables the judges to pass important judgments, and hence make the parties involved in the case obtain justice.
The lawyers should also be autonomous and have a body, which regulates their activities. The regulatory body should be set by the lawyers themselves to prevent the lawyers from victimization by the other arms of the government who perceive the lawyers as not acting according to their wishes. This body is responsible for the drafting of the code of conduct of the lawyers in the specific jurisdiction. The UN basic principles ensure that all countries, which are members of the United Nations, ensure the autonomy of the bodies to help in promoting justice in the specific areas. With regard to regulation, the UN basic principles state that:
“Codes of professional conduct for lawyers shall be established by the legal profession through its appropriate organs, or by legislation or in accordance with the national law and customs and recognized international standards and norms” (International Commission of Jurists, 2004).
The regulatory body is responsible for carrying out disciplinary measures against the lawyers. However, in undertaking the disciplinary measures, the regulatory bodies must ensure that they follow processes that conform to the basic principles of the United Nations (International Commission of Jurists, 2004, p. 68).
Conclusion
The accountability of judiciary is a very vital aspect in every democratic state. The members of the judiciary are prone to certain misconduct due to the nature of their practice. However, in ensuring proper accountability, proper measures must be taken to ensure that the members of the judiciary are not involved in any misconduct to improve the public confidence in the judicial system of the country.
References
Baraud, A. (2007). Voting for judges in the USA. Law report.
International Commission of Jurists. (2004). International principles on independence and accountability of judges lawyers and prosecutors: A practitioners guide. Geneva, ICJ. Web.
International Commission of Jurists. (2007). International Principles on the Independence and Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors: practitioners guide no. 1. Geneva, ICJ. Web.
Kleinig, J. (2008). Ethics and criminal justice: an introduction. London: Cambridge University Press. Web.
Political Information and Monitoring Service. (2007). Judicial accountability mechanisms: A resource document. Cape Town: Institute for Democracy in South Africa (IDASA). Web.
Prenzler, T. (2009). Ethics and Accountability in Criminal Justice: Towards a Universal Standard. Brisbane: Australian Academic Press. Web.