The Judiciary

Introduction

All modern societies tend to entrust the adjudication of disputes arising from the application of recognized norms to a specialized actor, the judge. Collectively, the judges are designed as the judiciary. In some countries—such as France and Italy—the judiciary also includes public prosecutors since they form a unitary organization together with judges.

Due to the significance of the adjudication, the judiciary tends to enjoy a special position in most political systems and especially so in constitutional democracies. In most political systems, since the middle of the 20th century, the significance of the judiciary has increased, leading to the phenomenon defined as “the judicialization of politics.”

The role of the judiciary in a political system cannot be analyzed without taking into consideration the institutional function of the judge: adjudication. Adjudication is a type of dispute resolution that relies on an externally appointed judge acting as the third party and where the parties to the dispute must comply with the judge's decision, even though they have no control over the choice of judge, who is appointed by the state. Therefore, all issues regarding the effectiveness of judiciary to operate as an effective check on government after recent reforms will be discussed in detail (Shapiro, 47-78).

Discussion

The determinative concept of the modern international political order, state sovereignty, is a social principle describing the right of a legitimate government to exercise absolute and final social, political, legal, and economic authority and influence over its citizenry within a geographically defined political territory to the exclusion of other nation-states. Under principles derived from the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, states possess final lawmaking authority within their territory, are vested with the right to self-determination, may pursue their own economic system, and, economic development, and, may provide for their own defense and protection of their citizenry. They may also choose to exploit their own natural resources and develop their unique political and, social structure as they see fit. Sovereign states are not subject to higher lawmaking authorities or political influence, are treated as equals with other states, and, obligated to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other nations (Glenn, 65).

It was a week like no other, one which the proud guardians of justice will probably wish to forget. Three high-profile events confirmed the existence of a malaise that is threatening the integrity and credibility of the judiciary. It started with the hearing of an immigration tribunal in Birmingham into the appeal by Sheikh Raed Salah against the Home Secretary's decision to deport him from the UK. That was followed by a public spat between the Home Secretary and the Minister of Justice over the former's call to scrap the Human Rights Act. Things went worse with the visit of the Israeli war crimes suspect, Tzipi Livni, ostensibly at the invitation of Foreign Secretary William Hague. If Justice Minister Kenneth Clarke was right to describe the evidence for scrapping the Human Rights Act as a parody, he would undoubtedly have described the case against Salah as utterly scandalous. While Home ...