Abstract
The regulatory mechanism combating judicial corruption and judicial misconduct in India lacks conceptual clarity, suffers role ambiguity, and bereft of functional autonomy. Its powers and duties are not clearly prescribed; procedures on the complaint, inquiry, and disciplinary action are ad hoc. The mechanism is opaque, inaccessible, slow, and ineffective. To the contrary, oversight mechanisms in the United Kingdom have autonomy and role clarity; powers and functions are defined and procedures are comprehensive. This research has genesis in these contradictions, and it aims to study the regulatory mechanisms of both the countries to guide reforms in Indian vigilance mechanism.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
