Introduction
Achievement of justice by any judicial system depends on a number of factors that include the nature of facts surrounding a case, forces internal and external to the judiciary; for example, politics and societal values, and finally the competence or characteristics of judges handling cases. Although most individuals may argue that, the nature of available evidence is the primary determinant of any court outcome; which to some extent is true, it is important to note that, the sitting judges have also a crucial role to play when it comes to passing judgments on cases. This is because, the court’s final decisions depend on what they pass, after critically listening to the prosecution and defendant’s presentations, which includes analyzing the nature of the evidence that the prosecution presents in court. In this regard, it, therefore, becomes important for all judicial systems to use proper procedures and ethics while appointing judges. This is because; the quality of case outcomes determines the rapport of any judicial system primarily, on how much that judicial system achieves justice for all.
Best Practises when Selecting Judge
The selection of judges is one of the hardest undertakings in most governments, considering the fact that, in the current world, many political ideologies have interfered with the running of judicial systems. In this regard, it is important for governments to ensure they protect their judges from influence from external forces, because the nature of case outcomes serves not only specific groups in the society, but rather can also affect a country’s reputation (Gambrell, (n.d.), p.109). Common criteria used by most states in choosing their adjudicators include election, selection, or appointments based on ones qualification and competence. Each of this method has its own merits and demerits however, considering the current state of many states; whereby politics plays a major role in almost any governmental undertaking, selection by merit is the only best method of ensuring judicial systems achieves their mandates. This is because, in most election and appointment cases, corruption looms widely, a fact that jeopardizes the quality of judicial systems. The fact that most politicians do not know individual merits of those in the contest makes the whole scenario worse because it puts at stake the credibility of any existing law system.
Achievement of justice requires transparency, which is a rare case in all hotly contested elections. Political leaders always fight to ensure that, all they support win contests. Such support is in most cases is egoistic that is, aimed at personal satisfaction rather than serving the entire society’s outcry for justice. Attending to all societal justice needs should be the primary task of any judge, something that they can only achieve through transparency and responsibility. Hence, this makes it important for the overall appointing exercise to be flawless, because any mistake made at this level will reflect itself when it comes to providing justice to all.
To ensure that the government appoints individuals of highest and correct merits, it is important for governments to conduct wide consultations among its judicial organs. Governments can achieve this by using their top management organs in the concerned ministry to select potential candidates. After such selections, consultations should follow within the judiciary; with chief justices, and among other society law groups within a specific country or region. Such consultations are important in order to avoid discriminations that may occur within a government. It is important to note that, any selections made must consider the performance capability, level of merit, and above all the repute of all involved subjects (Salomon, 2002, pp. 1-3). When checking the level of competence, experience plays a primary role in ascertaining an individual’s proficiency with the law of that country or state. This is because, for one to be able to correctly interpret and apply laws that govern a certain country, it is necessary for such individuals to know what application of certain laws really entails. Such understanding depends on a state’s law provisions and conditions under which such laws prevail or work. It is important to note here that, such interpretations should be independent from any external manipulations, something that governments can achieve via transparent and unbiased appointment procedures (Clarke, 2009, p. 2-3). It is important to note here that, it is important for governments to have special bodies that conduct all these activities, whereby the composition of such bodies must equally represent all concerned parties. These parties should include individual communities or states, the judiciary whereby, the justice minister should not miss, and law bodies within a country. Failure to include all these parties in such a crucial process may jeopardize the quality of outcomes. To ensure that such committees achieve their mandate, governments should safeguard them from external interferences, for example, interferences from the ruling elites, a factor that is achievable through protecting their independence (Lammers, 2009, p.1).
Accountability is another major component that such appointments must take into consideration. For transparency achievement, governments must make their purposes clear by strictly adhering to stipulated procedures and processes. This is achievable by governments making known to its citizens what is exactly required for one to qualify for such crucial seats, whereby such governments must draw clear benchmarks, which all participants of the process must follow.
Conclusion
In conclusion, in order for the government to ensure its judicial systems achieve desired outcomes, there is a need for the adoption of correct judge appointment systems. This is because; a country’s judicial system is one of the most important elements, which define the type of ruling mechanism that a country embraces hence a country’s external rapport.
References
Clarke, L. (2009). Selecting Judges: merit, moral, courage, judgment, and diversity. Senate Lecture Series. Web.
Gambrell, S. E. (n.d.). Better Ways for selecting Judges. Judicial Sociology, 109, Web.
Lammers, K. (2009). Criminal Law: what can be with the ideal way to choose a judge? Criminal Law. Web.
Salomon, C. (2002). Selecting an international arbitrator. Meador International Arbitration Report, 17(10), 1-2. Web.