Abstract
This article analyses the case law of the European Court of Human Rights relating to Parliamentary removal of a judge. The Court’s earlier approach did not extend the right to a fair trial to judicial removal motions before the Maltese unicameral House of Representatives. The Court’s latest case law has reversed its earlier interpretation with all the attendant consequential implications brought about for Malta which now has to amend its Constitution on the subject. This novel landmark interpretation implies that should Parliament attempt to remove a judge, that constitutional procedure will fall foul of the right to a fair trial.
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.
