Publication details
The Least Accountable Branch
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2013 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | International Journal of Constitutional Law |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icon/mos056 |
| Field | Law sciences |
| Keywords | judges; judicial accountability; judicial independence; rule of law; transitional justice; court presidents |
| Description | This article analyzes the concept of judicial accountability. It builds on three recent books (“Independence, Accountability, and the Judiciary” edited by Guy Canivet, Mads Andenas and Duncan Fairgrieve; “Transitional Justice, Judicial Accountability and the Rule of Law” by Hakeem Yusuf; and “Judicial Accountabilities in New Europe: From Rule of Law to Quality of Justice” by Daniela Piana) that deal with judicial accountability and suggests avenues for further research. In section 1, I briefly summarize the content and key arguments of the three recent books on judicial accountability. Section 2 focuses on the relationship between judicial accountability and the concept of accountability. Section 3 deals with the three key questions of judicial accountability: accountability of whom, to whom, and for what. Section 4 is devoted to the role of cultural factors in holding judges to account. Section 5 looks at various approaches to reckoning with the past within the judiciary and how these approaches affect post-authoritarian and post-totalitarian societies that are in the process of transition to democracy. Section 6 briefly examines the widely disputed relationship between judicial accountability and judicial independence. Section 7 identifies avenues for further research and section 8 concludes. |