Judicial Accountability Research Articles

Developing a concept of judicial accountability — the judicial integrity group and the Bangalore principles of judicial conduct

Developing a concept of judicial accountability — the judicial integrity group and the Bangalore principles of judicial conduct

On "Unitive distortions": toward a differential assessment of religious ecstasy.

The fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM), published in 1994, featured an entirely new category titled “Religious and Spiritual Problem” (category V62.89). The entry represents the medical community’s attempt to come to terms with such phenomena as near-death, peak, and transcendent experiences. It introduces a nosological distinction between spiritual problems complicated by mental pathology, and those effected by nonmorbid factors such as stress due to identity change, or the fear of social ridicule and ostracization. The inclusion of this category reflects an evolving reversal of long-standing trends amongst psychiatrists and psychoanalysts to dismiss religious experience as both pathological and regressive (Lukoff, Lu, & Turner, 1992). Indeed, the undisguised antipathy toward religion in early psychoanalytic writings is well known. Freud’s categorical pronouncements on the obsessive (1907), infantile and delusional character of belief (1927, 1930), or Alexander’s (1931) notorious claim that Buddhist meditation induces a form of schizophrenic catatonia, are but two examples of the kind of reductionism that has led many to assume that psychoanalysis is, by definition, intrinsically hostile to religion. Yet even early on thinkers such as Pfister (1948) and Erikson (1950) introduced a more judicious account of religiosity and its adaptive potential. On the strength of such key concepts as “regression in the service of the ego” (Kris, 1952), “transitional experience” (Winnicott, 1971) and the “self-object” (Bacal & Newman, 1990), a more recent array of post-Freudian scholars have successfully

Judicial Accountability and Immunity in Roman Law

I. Magistrates, In General: 1. Introduction; 2. Coercitio of the Magistrates; 3. The Role of the Senate; 4. Immunity while in Office; 5. The Issue of Deposition from Office; 6. Conclusion. II. Judges, In Particular: A. The Notion of Judge in Roman Law; B. Duties of Judges; C. Liability of Judges; D. Conclusion on the Liability of the Iudex ; E. Summary

Mechanisms of judicial accountability in British central government

The effectiveness of ministerial responsibility to Parliament as a sufficient check on the actions of ministers and officials is widely doubted. This article considers the utility of judicial forms of accountability and whether these mechanisms, to a greater or lesser extent, off-set the deficiencies commonly associated with the convention of ministerial responsibility. The first section offers a brief consideration of a number of constitutional, historical and theoretical issues. The second examines the impact of judicial accountability on central government. Exploring three distinct processes (judicial review, European Convention on Human Rights cases and judicial inquiries), it draws upon the wider literature and available research to evaluate the positive and negative aspects of each mechanism. The final section concludes that judicial forms of accountability have not evolved to remedy the shortcomings commonly identified with ministerial responsibility to Parliament. However, it is suggested that the constitutional equilibrium is changing and the role of the courts in relation to the executive may change dramatically in the (near) future.

Judicial Accountability of Perpetrators of Human Rights Violations and the Role of Victims*

Judicial Accountability of Perpetrators of Human Rights Violations and the Role of Victims*

Judicial Accountability: Issues

Judicial Accountability: Issues

Judicial Independence and Accountability—Who should Adorn the Bench?

Judicial Independence and Accountability—Who should Adorn the Bench?

ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN STATE JUDICIAL ELECTIONS: TOWARD GREATER JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY?

The role of elections in promoting accountability to popular sentiment is a central tenet of democratic theory. The extent to which such accountability is enhanced in judicial elections in the American states, however, is threatened by low levels of citizen involvement in contests for the state judiciary—due in part to ballot roll‐off: many voters, though already at the polls, simply ignore judicial contests. Critics of elections as a means of selecting state judiciaries contend that high ballot roll‐off renders citizen participation too low for such elections to secure greater judicial accountability. This research—an analysis of seventy‐one Kentucky counties voting in recent state supreme court elections—suggests that an emerging electoral technology, the electronic voting machine, substantially reduces ballot roll‐off in judicial elections, thereby increasing citizen participation in state judicial elections. These findings have significant implications for the debate over judicial selection by popular ballot.

Comment: Judicial Accountability and Discipline

Professor Steven Lubet of Northwestern University School of Law correctly observes that the primary point of friction between judicial independence and accountability is at the state level. Federal judges are not immune from accountability concerns, but those concerns are mitigated by the fact that federal judges serve with life tenure and can be removed from office only by impeachment. We judges in state courts deal with accountability issues more frequently and are more sensitive to them because we are only one election cycle away from unemployment. The judicial disciplinary process and the specter of politically motivated misconduct allegations against state judges poses another important challenge to judicial independence. I view the issue of judicial independence and accountability on three interdependent levels: political accountability, decisional accountability, and behavioral accountability. Political accountability includes selection, tenure, and the extent to which judges are accountable to the other branches of government for appropriations, definition of jurisdiction, and other issues related to the terms and conditions of our service in the judiciary. Decisional accountability concerns the manner in which judges are held accountable for rulings and decisions. While this principally takes place through appellate review, it also includes academic criticism of judicial actions. However, I question the extent to which most state court judges are concerned about academic reaction to their work. Most voters, including the lawyers who vote, do not read law review articles and case notes. I do not know of any judicial election campaigns that have featured scholarly reviews of a judge's decisions. Thus, apart from appellate review, decisional accountability occurs mainly in two sensitive places: legislative power to appropriate funding for the courts being manipulated in response to unpopular decisions and rulings, and media criticism of judicial decisions and rulings by politicians and at the grassroots level.

Separating Judicial Power

It seems most appropriate that the topic of this symposium is not simply judicial independence but judicial accountability as well. For while we want judges to be independent so that they can administer the law without fear of reprisal, we also want to find some way of controlling them. For independent power, as Jefferson wrote, is absolute power;1 there must be checks on judicial, as well as legislative and executive, authority. Our dilemma is like that of the King of Siam in Rogers and Hammerstein's play: Shall I join with other nations in alliance? If allies are weak, am I not best alone? If allies are strong, with power to protect me, Might they not protect me out of all I own?2

The one and the many: America's struggle for the common good

E pluribus unum no longer holds. Out of the many have come as many claims and grievances, all at war with the idea of one nation undivided. This text gives a judicious account of how the body politic has been torn between the imperative of one people, one voice and the separate urgings of distinct identities - racial, ethnic, religious, gendered, ideological, and economic. While the grand story of oneness is elusive, the text reminds the reader that there is a growing and ever more inclusive repertory of myths, symbols and histories on which to draw. The author envisions steps one might take to carry America past the new turbulence.

A Chronicle of Death Foretold: State-Sponsored Violence in Colombia

An official script that attributes political violence in Colombia to an all-powerful drug mafia has shielded the true identity of the killers of Colombian citizens from public scrutiny and judicial accountability.

UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS AT THE FEDERAL APPELLATE LEVEL: JUDICIAL WINDFALL OR DEMOCRATIC PITFALL?

The subject of limited publication of judicial opinions has generated controversy among students and practitioners of the law. Originally this tool was perceived as a viable method for providing some relief to judges from the burden of increasing caseloads. Because of the lack of uniformity and subjectivity of the publication, distribution and citation rules in the federal appellate circuits, the limited publication scheme can have a detrimental effect on the perception of equity in the law, judicial accountability and responsibility and overall judicial fairness. The authors explore these problems by examining recent data on the federal courts of appeals and offer proposed modifications to the use of this popular judicial tool.

Public personnel administration and constitutional values

Preface A New Framework for Public Personnel Management: Toward Judicial Accountability Property Rights, Liberty, and Due Process Protection Free Speech and Organizational Politics Equal Employment Opportunity and Public Policy Affirmative Action and the Constitution Pay Equity and a Battle of the Sexes Immunities and Liability in Public Management Implications for Management and Research Appendix: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Accountability v. Independence: Myths of Judicial Selection

The various methods of selecting state trial court judges continue to generate controversy. Partisan and nonpartisan elections, executive and legislative appointments, and the Missouri Plan represent a philosophy of judicial accountability versus judicial independence. The selection plans are described briefly; criticisms of the primary systems of judicial selection are presented. The authors conclude that appointive methods are no more effective than the elective process in placing qualified judges on the bench, while neither method is successful in fulfilling philosophical expectations.

<i>Diplomacy of Asymmetry: Korean-American Relations to 1910</i> (review)

Book Reviews219 Diplomacy of Asymmetry: Korean-American Relations to 1910. By John Chay. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1990. Pp. x, 239. Notes, bibliography, index. Unless their authors are of the caliber of a William Langer or a Fred Harvey Harrington, professional diplomatic histories of Korea tend to be reduced to yawn-inducing recitations of declarations, conferences, cables, memoranda, treaties, and the like. Few writers manage to put events in an enlightening domestic, regional, and global context, dig out the motives of the major actors, depict the nature and power of the trends in motion, capture the dramatic meaning of quiet stirrings or invisible activity, and present it all in lucid and vivid prose. Writing about Korean diplomatic history is clearly a tough job, but every now and then somebody has to "do" it. John Chay is the latest scholar to venture into this arena, and while he is no Langer or Harrington, he has been quite successful in avoiding the dull approach of merely reporting events. In fact, he offers a well-crafted, interesting, and fluid story. Many existing works on Korean-American relations examine specific episodes and personalities, but Chay's brief survey of the first fifty years of this interaction is a rare overall view. I must note with regret, however, that despite its title Chay's book is not a judicious account of the evolution of this relationship from Korean and American perspectives. Rather, it is largely an examination of how American policy on Korea was formed and how it affected the peninsula. Chay's focus and sources are overwhelmingly American, and the Korean angle is at best marginal to his presentation. The author begins with the obvious statement that Korean-American relations were "peculiar" because they were "asymmetrical." One's instinct is to retort, first, that of course the disparate size and power of the two nations made them inevitably so and, second, that nearly all bilateral international relations tend to be peculiar and asymmetrical. This being the case, why beat the dead horse endlessly? One is pleased lo discover soon, therefore, that Chay's objective is to explore something moie instructive: he wants to look at the various dimensions of the asymmetry and their combined effect on the course of Korean-American relations. Chay lays out a clear conceptual scheme for his project. He 220Journal of Korean Studies outlines the main structural and circumstantial factors that constituted the foundation of United States-Korean asymmetry. Chief among them were trade and investment, missionary activities, physical distance, strategic or security considerations, cultural proclivities, mutual images, and the personal values and styles of the principal foreign-policy makers in America. Briefly stated, trade with and investment in Korea remained, despite some growth, of tangential value to America but were of some consequence to Korea. Chay enlists persuasive statistical and illustrative evidence on this subject. The U.S. missionary interest in evangelical, education, medical, and publication activities in Korea grew slowly yet steadily after 1884, but to the Korean government it was all an insubstantial concern at first. American security interest in faraway Korea was. again, scarcely worth serious attention, except when it impinged on U.S. ties with China, Russia, and Japan. The Korean government, on the other hand, saw the distant land of America as a "strong" and "wealthy" yet "good natured" and "nonimperialist" nation, whose friendship could be of vital importance in the perilous sea of late nineteenth-century imperialism. Culturally, the United States, a product of "Greco-Roman" and "Judeo-Christian" world views, was a highly "materialistic," industrial, and "rationalistic" society. Korea, by contrast a Confucian-agrarian society, tended to take a more "moralistic" and "humanistic" view of life. At the same time, Korea was attracted to the advanced technology of America. This disproportion — and perhaps distortion — extended further into public images. Using the theories of Kenneth Boulding, Gabriel Almond, and James Rosenau, Chay discusses the influence of the attentive, as opposer! to the mass, public of America on U.S. foreign policy. Despite its small share — perhaps no more than 25 percent — of the population, the attentive public was a noteworthy force. Prominent newspapers and magazines, such as the New York Times, Outlook...

Judicial Accountability in South Africa

(1990). Judicial Accountability in South Africa. South African Journal on Human Rights: Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 251-265.

Friends and Neighbors Voting in Judicial Retention Elections: a Research Note Comparing Trial and Appellate Court Elections

T HIS brief article reports the variations in the friends and neighbors effect when judicial retention elections for major trial courts are compared with judicial retention elections for appellate courts. Previous work on major trial court retention elections (Aspin and Hall 1987) reported that while voters in the home county of the judge were more likely to vote than were the voters in the rest of the district, there was no home county advantage in affirmative votes. Standing in sharp contrast to the trial court pattern is the clear home county advantage reported herein for appellate court retention elections. This home county advantage is similar in magnitude to that recently reported for statewide partisan elections (Rice and Macht 1987); however, in contrast to the reported patterns for partisan elections, the home county advantage for appellate court retention elections is related to population. The friends and neighbors effect is a calculated promotion of local interest. Voters support a candidate not primarily for what he stands for or because of his capacities, but because of where he lives (Key 1949: 37). Key labeled the appeal-back the home-town boyirrelevant, but he noted that in the absence of traditional voting cues, such an appeal based on boosterism can exert no little influence over an electorate (Key 1949: 41). Judicial retention elections became a part of the judicial selection process with the development of the system of merit selection. This merit selection process and the use of retention plebiscites were two efforts aimed at taking politics out of judicial selection. The merit selection process was seen as a practical compromise between those who sought an independent judiciary and those whose goal was judicial accountability. The merit selection process was designed first to get quality judges into office and then to ensure they would be able to serve for long periods of time. Although the judges would be insulated from political influences and removal from the

The Civil Liability of Judges in the United States

The legal responsibility of judges to those whom they have injured is a long-standing issue in the United States, one that has proved divisive and exceedingly difficult to resolve. Public controversy over judicial accountability for wrongs, however, is not limited to the United States; it is likely to arise in any society that aspires to democratic government and the rule of law. One should expect that different legal systems would regulate the liability of judges differently. After all, the roles of judgestheir formal authority, informal functions, social status, self-conception, and public legitimacy-vary considerably from country to country. The nature and magnitude of the problem of judicial misconduct, and the structures of civil, criminal, and administrative responsibility, likewise vary. It would be surprising indeed if the systems of liability did not reflect these variations. In Italy, for example, the system of judicial responsibility has recently been transformed by the intersection of terrorism, corruption, and politics. That system has become the focus of an intense, divisive, partisan public debate, which has spawned a rapid sequence of far-reaching developments: a national campaign leading to a 1987 referendum on the subject, which required the adoption of new rules on judicial responsibility;' enactment by the Italian Parliament of a special statute in 1988 that seeks to coordinate official and governmental liability for judicial wrongs;2 and a January 1989 decision by the Constitutional Court interpreting the new statute in a way

French Military War Aims, 1914–1916

In his recent book, French war aims against Germany, 1914–1919, David Stevenson comes to the heart of the problem relative to the diplomatic prolongation of World War I. ‘No Government’, he asserts, ‘was willing to jettison its war aims in the interest of a compromise peace, or to place itself at the enemy's mercy while a chance of victory remained’. His work is to be applauded, therefore, for he has given us the first succinct and judicious account of the course of official French war aims from 1916 to 1919, enlarging upon a topic heretofore treated in scholarly articles. Using the wealth of archival documentation now available, and the private papers of numerous participants, Stevenson has made a major and much-needed contribution to our knowledge of the subject by tracing the relationship between official war aims policy, peace diplomacy and the diplomatic impact of allied policy on French war aims from their inception to the Versailles settlement.