This question is spilt into two parts the first part being the different processes which change law need to be examined and the second part being the question that the judiciary does not actively make laws besides in opportunistic ways. To assess these two questions we need to explain the different processes which lead to law reform, a look at the parliamentary system in making laws and changing laws, The judiciary system will be reviewed to look at the impact they have on law reform and how they interpret the laws and set out precedents through their interpretation. Institutions set up by the state such as the law committee have to be looked at their input in changing the law. External institutions such as the EU will need to be examined to see the role it plays in changing laws in the country and how the judiciary system is affected by the changes.
To establish the judiciary system connection with the changing of laws their first to establish who should create laws. Laws should be created by a democratic process, it should be carried out by the government in parliament as it has political legitimacy in the the state. This makes parliament the most important source of law as it consists of elected MPs. If the population of the state does not like the laws of the land they can vote for a different government in the state have similar views to their own.
The reasons why the judiciary system should not change laws is that the Judiciary system is independent from other organisation and this is a essential part in the running of the judiciary system. This allows the 'judiciary not being involved and not having any personal interest in advantage in the case they are working on so they enforce the law and not create it' (unit 26, ...
... middle of paper ...
...n the making and changing of laws. If a citizen of the state believes his rights have not been upheld he can apply to the Court in Strasbourg to take up his case. This shows the major influence the EU has in the laws of the country. The Judges in Strasbourg court have ordered the Judges in the UK to make their decisions on the precedents the EU courts have issued. The judiciary is important in law making as it has a major secondary role in making laws. The Judiciary role is to impose the laws that have been created by parliament, the judiciary applies these laws creating precedents and these in itself become a kind of law. This question on the role in the judiciary quoted is one that I agree with. The Judiciary only creates law through opportunist ways of interpreting the law and it is disbarred from the process as it is not elected by the citizens of the state.
Judges can also change laws in court. The laws that are changed in court by a judge are usually less predictable and are harder to be controlled thank congressional changes
In Corinne Barrett Lain, “Upside- Down Judicial Review”, she presents the idea of instead of upside down judicial review and how it has worked to transform the present courts of modern times. Lain argues her point of upside down Judicial review being used by the Supreme court in order to stray away from the majority's views of the other branches of government. Lain speaks of the idea of when widespread attitudes change on a certain issue of time, but the law hasn’t changed, there is a certain type of pressure that builds up that implements change. Nevertheless, the changing of the attitudes gives force of the law in the way that one's attitude, values and policy preferences start to show in larger society settings. However, the only job of the court is to respond to prevailing norms that are unable to be decided in another form of the government branches.
This was the beginning of the hurdle that has been fighting the reforms in the judicial system. In turn the citizens were highly affected since the reason was brought about by the groups of interest like businessmen and cooperation. The election of judges was affected by high level of monetary involvement and expensive campaigns that were funded by politicians and high interest persons in the government and business sector.
laws is to keep the bad things out from the old society out such as
The first reason the law should change is that Judges see the world differently from what it was to what it is now. For example, Antonin Scalia was on the Supreme Court from 1986 to 2016.30 years is a lot of time, with a lot of time usually comes a lot of change. This can be seen very clearly in the United States. One major difference that has occurred is the internet. In the 80’s there wasn't any phones or any computers. This meant that if you had a
all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or may they act by representatives, freely and
The European Foreign and Security Policy is a necessary and important part of the European Union. These policies are discussed, drawn up, voted on and put into effect by the European Council. However, to implement a policy the vote within the Council must be unanimous, without unanimity no policy will be implemented . The rule of law in the European Union is essential to many of its actions, both at home and abroad. The rule of law is “that every action taken by the EU is founded on treaties that have been approved voluntarily and democratically by all EU member countries.”...
Legal Pluralism is the presence of various legal systems within a single country or a geographical area. Legal Pluralism is omnipresent although it is generally assumed to exist in countries only with a colonial past. This is because in most countries with a colonial past, colonial laws co-exist alongside indigenous laws. However, if we look at the expansive definition of legal pluralism, it can be said that every society or country if legally plural. The modern definition of legal pluralism also deals with the issues of relation between state and non-state legal orders. It shows the dichotomy that exists between customary legal norms and state law. The judiciary of India has upheld this principle of pluralism in many cases by showing that
The rule of law and its set of requirements attempted to give the specifics to which lawmakers could govern not only legally but responsibly. Not only restricting extra-legal use of power but also its practice limits injustice. Thus it is often argued that the rule of law is only instrumentally morally valuable, valuable when and to the extent that a legal system is used to purse morally valuable ends . So as such the rule of law is instrumentally valuable, drawing attention to state-atrocities and the implications it has on the government and her citizens.
The Judges and Magistrates also had to be qualified for their positions in the court. A Judge must be thorough in Dharma and have the qualifications equivalent to that of a minister. A Judge shall be fair and impartial in order to gain the trust of the population into the legal system of the state. There should be a bench of 3 judges who shall hold court at frontier posts, sub – district headquarters, and provincial
The judicial process basically involves a series on intertwined roles and procedures for resolving disputes through an authoritative individual or people whose decisions tend to be obeyed on a regular basis. The judicial process or functions also involve the use of administrative agencies, which were created to help the government in enacting the law in a simpler and more direct way than the legislature. Given the nature of their functions, administrative agencies do not necessarily adhere to the civil procedure established for courts and employ less formal means of pursuing their actions. However, there are various concepts and processes of administrative agency judicial functions in relation to different components
The grounds of judicial review help judges uphold constitutional principles by, ensuring discretionary power of public bodies correspond with inter alia the rule of law. I will discuss the grounds of illegality, irrationality and proportionality in relation to examining what case law reveals about the purpose and effect these grounds.
The courts have the function of giving the public a chance to present themselves whether to prosecute or defend themselves if any disputes against them rise. It is known to everyone that a court is a place where disputes can be settled while using the right and proper procedures. In the Criminal court is the luxury of going through a tedious process of breaking a law. Once you have been arrested and have to go to court because of the arrest, you now have a criminal case appointed against you. The court is also the place where a just, fair and unbiased trial can be heard so that it would not cause any disadvantage to either of the party involved in the dispute. The parties are given a chance to represent themselves or to choose to have a legal representative, which is mostly preferred by many.
The rule of law is one of the key constitutional principles that help’s to ensure fairness and democracy in the UK’s constitution. The basic definition of the rule of law is that nobody can override the law; everyone and anyone must obey the law in its full entirety. The rule of law holds an important role in the constitution. However, the concept is something that cannot be easily defined and is subject to change as society evolves. This constitutional principle matters because society needs to be able to uphold a strong balance between regulation and structure. The rule of law has no single meaning and
Social change and the law are codependent. If one wishes to see progress in the world, a world crippled with corruption, ignorance, fear, and hate amongst other injustices, he or she must acknowledge the relationship that law and social change have on one another. Social change requires a shift in the mindset of a collective body. It requires the norms of a culture to gradually change and progress with the values of the evolving society in order for change to happen. Laws change over time as the society’s values evolve. Thus, new laws come about when values change and conversely, laws change or progress when values change or progress. Laws create social change as social change creates law. The relationship is cyclical.