scholarly journals Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Frans van Dijk
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Central Question

AbstractThe central question that this book will try to answer is whether there is a lack of alignment and—in the extreme—a disconnect between the judiciary and society in countries of Europe (EU and UK). This central question is developed into six sub questions. The sub questions focus on perceptions of judicial independence by various actors, their respect for independence and the trust of the general public in the judiciary.

scholarly journals Perceptions of Judicial Independence in European Countries

2020 ◽  
pp. 29-51
Author(s):  
Frans van Dijk
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Recent Experience ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Highly Educated ◽  
Education Levels ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lower Education ◽  
The Difference

AbstractThe perceptions of judicial independence of judges, lawyers, general public and companies are analysed across countries. The perceptions of these categories are strongly correlated. However, the mean scores differ: judges are much more positive about their independence than lawyers, and lawyers are much more positive than the general public and companies. As to the general public, highly educated citizens are generally more positive about the presence of independence than citizens with lower education levels. The difference increases with the degree of independence. Citizens with little education in very different countries have similar perceptions of judicial independence. The limited information that is available about court users suggests that persons with recent experience with the courts are less positive about independence than persons without experience. For companies the reverse is apparent. Among both the general public and companies, the perceptions diverge more with experience than without experience, likely as a result of winning or losing a case.

scholarly journals Perceptions of Lay Judges About Independence of the Judiciary

2020 ◽  
pp. 53-63
Author(s):  
Frans van Dijk
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Selection Effects ◽  
Highly Educated

AbstractLay judges are citizens with particular knowledge of and experience with the judiciary. The findings of a survey among the lay judges of ten judiciaries are examined in this chapter. It is found that the perceptions of lay judges of judicial independence, their own as well as that of the professional judges, are very similar to the perceptions of the professional judges. In addition, lay judges are most positive about their independence, when they participate in judicial panels together with professional judges and when they are taken seriously by the professional judges. For them, these conditions surpass sitting alone as a judge. Although selection effects may play a role, the results indicate that experience as a lay judge leads to a much higher appreciation of judicial independence than that of (highly educated) citizens in general. This in turn indicates that the views of the general public are too negative about judicial independence.

Managing the Selection Debate

2019 ◽  
pp. 125-158
Author(s):  
Charles Gardner Geyh
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Campaign Finance ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Performance Evaluations ◽  
Electoral Accountability ◽  
Judicial Selection ◽  
Judicial Performance

Chapter 6 argues that we can come closer to consensus in the judicial selection debate by confronting and overcoming the errors and exaggerations that chapter 5 isolates. That said, complete consensus is likely to remain elusive because ultimately, judicial independence from electoral accountability is both in tension with and essential to democracy. As the chapter discusses, appointive systems are a preferable default, but there are circumstances in which electoral accountability can be essential to the judiciary’s perceived legitimacy with the general public. The chapter also suggests ways in which elected judiciaries can be made more impartial and independent, including reforming campaign finance, amending disqualification rules, and lengthening judicial terms, as well as greater accountability, as well as the ways that appointed judiciaries can be made more accountable via publicizing existing accountability-promoting mechanisms, reinvigorating disqualification procedure, and instituting rigorous judicial performance evaluations.

scholarly journals Sexualization of Children in Deepfakes and Hentai: Examining Reddit User Views

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Eelmaa
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Central Question ◽  
Large Dataset ◽  
A Minor

Based on a large dataset (N=13293) of Reddit comments collected on the topic, this article takes a qualitative approach to examine Reddit users’ views and attitudes about the sexualization of minors (SOM) in deepfakes and hentai. The analysis captured five major themes in the discussion over SOM: illegality, art, promoting pedophilia, increase in offending and general harmfulness. Furthermore, the discussion was underscored by the central question of who is a minor, which feeds the already problematic definitional ambiguity and keeps the perceived discursive boundaries of the illegality of SOM in flux. Current study adds to the existing literature by presenting information that could be useful in designing prevention and awareness efforts addressing SOM and CSAM, particularly to the general public.

scholarly journals Judicial Independence and Perceptions of Judicial Independence

2020 ◽  
pp. 7-28
Author(s):  
Frans van Dijk
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Institutional Trust ◽  
European Level ◽  
Positive Perception ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Theoretical Considerations ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe three key concepts of this study are: perceived judicial independence, respect for judicial independence and trust in the judiciary. To provide the basis for the empirical chapters that follow, theoretical considerations are explored. Due to the subjective nature of independence, perceptions matter. According to European case law, the appearance of independence needs to be taken into account when the independence of a court is evaluated. The perceptions held by parties, lawyers, media, general public and judges are not homogeneous, and depend on different sets of factors. In the literature, it is widely believed that the judiciary needs a positive perception of independence to gain the trust of society. This trust in turn bolsters the legitimacy of the judiciary. Trust and legitimacy are many-faceted concepts. In this study trust is used in the sense of diffuse institutional trust. Respect for independence is used as an expression of the legitimacy of the judiciary. These concepts apply to the national courts and to the courts at the EU/European level. To understand judicial independence in Europe, both levels need to be examined in conjunction.

Ethics in the Judiciary System of Bangladesh

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 34-36
Author(s):  
Mehedi Imam
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
The Other ◽  
Considerable Time ◽  
Ethical Knowledge ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
Role Players ◽  
High Level

In Bangladesh, demand for judicial independence in practice has been a much debated issue and the demand is fulfilled but expectation of people is not only limited to have an independent judiciary but to have an impartial system and cadre of people, which will administer justice rationally being free from fear or force. The independence of judiciary and the impartial judicial practice are related concepts, one cannot sustain without the other and here existence as well as the need of practicing impartiality is well recognized. But the art of practicing impartiality does not develop overnight as it’s related to development of one’s attitude. It takes a considerable time resulting from understanding, appreciating and acknowledging the moral values, ethics and professional responsibility. The judiciary includes Judges, Advocates mostly who are expected to demonstrate a high level of moral values and impartiality towards people seeking justice and ‘rule of law’. This is true that bench officers and clerks are also part of the process to ensure rule of law with same level of participation by the law enforcing agencies such as police. However the paper includes only those who either join judiciary as Judge/Magistrate or Advocate to explore level and extent of ethical knowledge they receive being key role players of the system. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/bioethics.v1i2.9628 Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2010; 1(2): 34-36

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document