Constitutional Obligation and Responsibilities of the Judges in a Contemporary Era: A Critical Study

Every democracy is governed under a set of fundamental values that apply to every branch of the government. The legislative, executive and judiciary are the three branches of government. There should be no disagreement in democracy on some basic principles that govern judge’s selection, promotion, and accountability mechanisms. This mechanism shall include the independence of the judiciary, not be arbitrary, and judges should be selected based on the right attributes. There should be some credible mechanism for holding the judiciary accountable for any possible misconduct. Therefore, it is often argued that judicial independence and accountability are contending ends. The issue of judicial accountability offers a particular perspective on the broader subject of public confidence in the courts and the justice system, in which everything from access to justice to judicial activism is discussed. However, it should emphasise at the outset that the accountability of the judiciary to the community is also a specific issue, concerned as it is with constitutional and ethical matters of a particular sort, in which a proper balance must be maintained between judicial independence, on one side, and judicial accountability, on the other. The author in this book chapter will try to highlight the procedural mechanism of judges and judicial accountability in various democratic nations. In any constitutional democracy, the priority is to select judges wisely and fairly so that the foundation of the justice delivery system remains strong. The author will also focus on the critical aspects of political interferences in judicial matters. The judges are not infallible; they may commit turpitude without accountability. It is imperative to make a thorough analysis of the judge’s appointment and their post-retirement benefits. The comparative analysis shows how essential the judiciary is to past, present, and future governance. The author contends that the nature of that function supports the requirement for judicial accountability in the transition process as a crucial step toward establishing full accountability for the past and facilitating institutional reform and transformation as a component of political change.