English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

“judicial immunity” seems to take away basic human rights under a court case called Re East: Ex Parte Nguyen:
Seems that when the government wants to hide something they can.
Does anyone know of a court case that will over rule the one above.
I was sent a link by human rights body in Australia (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1998/73.html) that basically says that id there are other avenues then you cant take the government under civil action.

Surly if a Judge works outside his guide lines or any other government body then why are they not responsible like a doctor or trades person?
Please help

2007-03-28 01:57:10 · 2 answers · asked by twitchdownunder 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

2 answers

Judicial Immunity is a form of legal immunity which protects judges and others employed by the judiciary from lawsuits brought against them for official conduct in office.

For example, a judge may not be the subject of a libel suit for statements made about a criminal defendant during a trial. Nor may a judge's clerk be sued for negligence in failing to deliver materials to the judge.

The purpose of judicial immunity is twofold: it encourages judges to act in a fair and just manner, without regard to the possible extrinsic harms their acts may cause outside of the scope of their work and it protects government workers from harassment from those whose interests they might negatively affect.

Historically, judicial immunity was associated with the English common law idea that "the King can do no wrong." (Compare Sovereign immunity.) Judges, the King's delegates for dispensing justice, accordingly "ought not to be drawn into question for any supposed corruption [for this tends] to the slander of the justice of the King." Floyd & Barker, 12 Co. Rep. 23, 25, 77 Eng. Rep. 1305, 1307 (Star Chamber 1607).

Judicial immunity has a number of critics. Some argue that judges are capable of grievous abuses against defendants during trials. Others claim that judicial immunity allows for judges to make decisions which do not agree with the thinking or sentiment of the people of a country. In the US, judicial immunity has come under attack during several times: the Terri Schiavo case, or during abortion cases, for example. Ron Branson, of California, has introduced J.A.I.L 4 Judges as part of a nationwide effort to strip judges of their immunity.

2007-03-28 02:03:06 · answer #1 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0 1

Judges can be impeached. They can be overruled by a higher court. Local pressure from citizens can push a judge to do the right thing. I understand your question. We are seeing more judges in the U.S. making laws rather than interpreting them.

2007-03-28 08:15:54 · answer #2 · answered by Matt 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers