Sentences with phrase «of judicial independence as»

That statement told me that the judges were likely caught somewhat by surprise by the announcement or by the contents of the Green Paper, specifically its identification of judicial independence as a challenge to reform.

Not exact matches

Criticism of the scope of judicial power is often perceived by its partisans as, in effect, attacking the independence of the judiciary or even the ideal of judicial independence.

Opponents see bills as an erosion of judicial independence under populist Law and Justice party

The Polish parliament has approved government proposals to hand the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) effective control of judicial appointments and the supreme court, in a move seen by critics as an erosion of judicial independence.

They were also exposed to improving access to justice: the role of the media as a partner, press freedom and responsible journalism: Is the media a threat to judicial independence and the role of the public complaint unit in effective justice delivery.

Onnoghen, who had served in acting capacity for four months, had his appointment confirmed by the Bukola Saraki - led Senate after series of questions which bordered on independence of the judiciary, judicial reforms, corruption in the Judiciary as well as disobedience of Court orders.

All codes of judicial conduct espouse the values of judicial independence, impartiality, integrity, diligence and competence, as evidenced by The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002), which was signed by the chief justices of 29 cojudicial conduct espouse the values of judicial independence, impartiality, integrity, diligence and competence, as evidenced by The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002), which was signed by the chief justices of 29 cojudicial independence, impartiality, integrity, diligence and competence, as evidenced by The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002), which was signed by the chief justices of 29 coJudicial Conduct (2002), which was signed by the chief justices of 29 countries.

How safe is the framework of separation of powers and the critical concepts it protects, such as judicial independence, if so much of the citizenry does not even know the system exists — or what its role is?

As Hamilton stressed, judicial independence is deeply interwoven with the ideals of democracy.

Over the next several months, we will publish thoughtful pieces written by lawyers, judges, and others that delve into various subtopics of judicial independence, including such characteristics as fairness, impartiality, access to justice, and adherence to the rule of law.

Because of how the principle of judicial independence is interpreted by courts, the original trial judge in this case could not be asked why it had taken 9 months to reach a verdict, and could not be questioned whether the delay was due to the complexity of the case, the judge's workload, or other personal reasons, such as illness.

In this respect, the AGBC's position that as long as the government does not interfere with the cases the court is permitted to hear judicial independence is respected, is an inappropriately constricted view of the court's constitutional place.

As you can see, social media and social media content raise serious issues for the judiciary, with regards to independence, integrity and ethical standards, admissibility of evidence, the availability of ex parte information, the extent of judicial notice, practice rules, the right to a fair trial and juror conduct.

However, David Thomas, doyen of sentencing experts, having expressed his opposition to the whole idea of a Sentencing Commission, said that if one was established, he had «grave doubts about the wisdom of involving serving senior judges in the activities of such a body... as there is a tendency to confuse the roles of the judges in their different capacities and a consequent tendency to compromise judicial independence.»

Writing in this week's NLJ, columnist Jon Robins notes that he spoke up for the principle of judicial independence during the Article 50 Supreme Court case last November, when the Daily Mail attacked the judges as «Enemies of the people».

Judicial control over the matters [of] assignment of judges, sittings of the court, and court lists — as well as the related matters of allocation of court rooms and direction of the administrative staff engaged in carrying out these functions, has generally been considered the essential or minimum requirement for institutional or «collective» independence.»

Courts» inherent or implied jurisdiction does not allow courts «to enter the field of political matters such as the allocation of public funds, absent a Charter challenge or concern for judicial independence» (para 41).

Is that reluctance consistent with the inherent jurisdiction of the court, judicial independence and the independence of the bar as formal (or informal) constitutional ideals?

[48] An interesting historical note — this letter was originally drafted by those in the Office of the Chief Justice of the Provincial Division and serves as a strong indication of the Court's commitment to judicial independence and its growing reputation.

Data is relatively limited and fairly dated as to the diversity composition of various state benches; most authorities cite a report by the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Judicial Independence (first published in 2004 and updated last in 2010) or a 2009 compilation of data by the American Judicature Society.

A judge may participate in electronic social networking, but as with all social relationships and contacts, a judge must comply with relevant provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct and avoid any conduct that would undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality, or create an appearance of impropriety.

These attacks on judicial independence come as President Donald Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions have also questioned the very legitimacy of federal judges who rule against the administration.

But because of the blurred line between law, policy and morality, the centrality of judicial independence, and the unique ability of judges to speak to certain moral and political issues, we must not label every obiter comment by a judge as misconduct.

This is precisely the sort of attack on the impartiality of the judiciary that defenders of judicial independence such as me loathe and rise to condemn.

«The New York State Bar Association has long supported judicial independence as essential to maintaining the rule of law and protecting individual rights.

In the final paragraph, EPLAW therefore «urges the Council to use this opportunity to propose an amendment to Article 11 EPC and in any event to critically review the Guidelines for Investigation [the basis on which the suspension happened] so as to avoid any further concern with respect to the principle of judicial independence at the EPO.»

I regard this as a blot on judicial independence which should not be tolerated, and it speaks loudly of the misconception that the governmental authorities, who are responsible in this matter, have of the meaning of judicial independence.

[6] Great care is taken in the introduction to Bigelow's book — even though it is intended only as a guide — to reassure readers that judicial independence is of primary concern: «Each magistrate, of course, must in each case make up his own mind not only as to sentence, but also as to questions of law.»

Ironically, however, in the ECJ context, it is the absence of dissent that is thought to preserve judicial independence, as a single collegiate opinion is said to shield judges from national political pressures.

As a result, a large and ever - increasing body of literature has developed on matters relating to judicial appointments, judicial independence, judicial policymaking and the like.

As lawyer Abdullah Khalil writes in Judges and Political Reform in Egypt, since its creation in 1875, the niyaba «has been trapped between the executive and the judicial authority and has lacked real independence from the Ministry of Justice.»

It introduces students to the role of judges within our judicial system, and encourages exploration of important concepts such as the rule of law, judicial independence and judicial impartiality.

an infringement of judicial independence can only be justified where there are «dire and exceptional financial emergencies caused by extraordinary circumstances such as the outbreak of war or imminent bankruptcy»

As recent decisions demonstrate, our current Supreme Court judges are the model of judicial independence.

The Conférence des juges de paix magistrats du Québec and several presiding justices of the peace («PJPs») filed a motion to strike down provisions of the Act to amend the Courts of Justice Act and other legislative provisions as regards the status of justices of the peace («the Act») and the Courts of Justice Act on the ground the scheme established by the impugned provisions did not guarantee judicial independence.

Through its commitment to judicial independence and impartiality, and its efforts to ensure access to justice, it stands today as one of the primary bastions of the rule of law in Quebec.

The judicial tribunals on which this book focuses are the same executive branch organizations that, as noted above, were called «judicial tribunals» in the McRuer Report; the same organizations that, in 1990, Ed Ratushny's Report on the Independence of Federal Administrative Tribunals and Agencies described as «tribunals which are adjudicative» and for which it recommended the label «tribunal» be exclusively reserved; and the same organizations that in 1991 the late Chief Justice of Canada Antonio Lamer, in a keynote speech to the conference of the Council of Canadian Administrative Tribunals, referred to as bodies that are «created to operate essentially as adjudicators... in a manner that is similar to the function of the judiciary... [and] expected to dispense justice in the same sense as the courts of law.»

several constitutional principles other than the rule of law that have been recognized by this Court — most notably democracy and constitutionalism — very strongly favour upholding the validity of legislation that conforms to the express terms of the Constitution (and to the requirements, such as judicial independence, that flow by necessary implication from those terms).

Second, I consider a number of characteristics of courts as institutions, including judicial independence, judicial training, and collective decision - making on appellate courts.

The question, it found, was settled by the Supreme Court's decision in Ocean Port Hotel Ltd. v. British Columbia (General Manager, Liquor Control and Licensing Branch), 2001 SCC 52, [2001] 2 S.C.R. 781, which held that the principle of judicial independence did not apply to administrative tribunals, except insofar as their decisions concerned rights protected by sections 7 or 11 (d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

(b) shall maintain the dignity appropriate to judicial office and act in a manner consistent with the impartiality, integrity, and independence of the judiciary, and shall encourage members of the candidate's family to adhere to the same standards of political conduct in support of the candidate as apply to the candidate;

Justice Pariente co-chairs the National Association of Women Judges» Judicial Independence Committee which works on issues relating to the independence of the judiciary, particularly as they affect women and minoIndependence Committee which works on issues relating to the independence of the judiciary, particularly as they affect women and minoindependence of the judiciary, particularly as they affect women and minority judges.

Although there has been great debate as to the proper level of administrative independence that is required for courts to comply with the requirements of section 11 d) of the Charter, the Supreme Court's objection to decree 2015 - 1071 seems to implicate that IT procurement falls within the definition of «matters of administration bearing directly on the exercise of [a court's] judicial function», to quote justice Le Dain in Valente.

The Cato Institute «s new release, Economic Freedom Of The World: 2008 Annual Report, gives Hong Kong as the highest rating in the world, largely based on legal factors such as judicial independence.

As to the role of the lord chancellor, the committee says this is central to the maintenance of judicial independence and the rule of law: «Prime Ministers must therefore ensure that they continue to appoint to the post candidates of sufficient status and seniority» (HL, para 71).

A judge may participate in electronic social networking, but as with all social relationships and contacts, a judge must comply with relevant provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct and avoid any conduct that would undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality, or create an appearance of

Over the past year I've written about the Emoluments Clause; the No Religious Tests clause; limits on presidential power as defined in the steel seizure case; the meaning of the oath of office; how the Appropriations Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether gerrymandering by race and for partisan advantage affects constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall of the Contracts Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to list.

An enforcement guideline is not the same as a judicial guideline: by making an enforcement guideline in the name of the Commission, as opposed to the head of enforcement, the CRTC is at peril of compromising its judicial independence.