• E4J University Module Series: Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice

• Module 14: Independence of the Judiciary and the Role of Prosecutors

• Introduction and learning outcomes

• Key issues

  • Topic 1.  Judicial independence
  • • General issues. Judicial independence as a fundamental value of the rule of law and of constitutionalism
    • The main factors aimed at securing judicial independence
  • Topic 2.  The role of public prosecutors
  • • General issues. Public prosecutors as the 'gate keepers' of criminal justice.
    • The institutional and functional role of prosecutors: different models and practices:
    • Other factors affecting the role of prosecutors: appointment, tenure and conduct.
  • References

• Exercises

• Possible class structure

• Core reading

• Advanced reading

• Student assessment

• Additional teaching tools

•  

• First published in February 2020
  

•  

  This module is a resource for lecturers  

References

• Binnie, Justice Ian (2011). Judicial independence in Canada . Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
• Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law (2015). The Appointment, Tenure and Removal of Judges under Commonwealth Principles. A Compendium and Analysis of Best Practice . London: Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law.
• Blankenburg, Erhard (2004). Independence and accountability of the judiciary - Two sides of a coin: some observation on the rule of law in Central Europe. In: A. Sajó, eds. Judicial integrity. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Council of Europe, European Commission for Democracy through law (2016). Rule of Law Checklist . Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
• Council of Europe (2010). Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities . Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
• Council of Europe (1950). European Convention on Human Rights. Rome: EU, Article 6.
• Dandurand, Yvon (2007). The role of prosecutors in promoting and strengthening the rule of law. Journal of Crime Law Social Change, vol. 47, 247-259.
• Dallara, Cristina, Piana, Daniela (2015). Networking the rule of law: How change agents reshape judicial governance in the EU. London: Ashgate.
• Dawson, Brettel, Schultz, Ulrike, and Shaw, Gisela (2015). Editorial: Gender and Judicial Education International Journal of the Legal Profession, vol. 21, No. 3, 255-257.
• Di Federico, Giuseppe (1998). Prosecutorial independence and the democratic requirement of accountability in Italy. British Journal of Criminology, vol. 38, No. 3, 371-387.
• Di Federico, Giuseppe (2008a). Political relevance, independence and accountability of the judiciary. In: R. Coman and C. Dallara, eds. Handbook on Judicial Politics. Romania: Editura Institutal European lasi.
• Di Federico, Giuseppe (2008b). Independence and accountability of the public prosecutors. In: R. Coman and C. Dallara, eds. Handbook on Judicial Politics. Romania: Editura Institutal European lasi.
• Di Federico, Giuseppe (2012). Judicial Accountability and Conduct: An Overview. In: A. Seibert-Fohr, eds. Judicial Independence in Transition. Heidelberg: Springer.
• Du Plessis, Anton, Redpath, Jean, Schonteich, Martin (2008). Report on the South African National Prosecuting Authority. SA Crime Quarterly, No. 50.
• Friedman, Lawrence M. (1985). Total Justice . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Friedman, Barry (2004). History, politics and judicial independence. In: A. Sajó, eds. Judicial integrity. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) and Council of Europe (2012). Lessons learnt from the three Evaluation Rounds, 2000-2010 . Strasbourg: GRECO and Council of Europe.
• Guarnieri, Carlo (2010). The politics of judicial reforms. In: R. Coman and C. Dallara, eds. Handbook on Judicial Politics. Romania: Editura Institutal European lasi.
• Guarnieri, Carlo and Pederzoli, Patrizia (2002). The Power of Judges. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hack, Péter (2004). Judicial Integrity. In: A. Sajó, eds. Judicial integrity. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Holden, Livia (2018). Women Judges in Pakistan . International Journal of the Legal Profession, vol. 26, No. 1, 89-104.
• Huhtanen, Heather and Halilovic (2014). Gender stereotypes and attitudes within the judiciary of Bosnia and Herzegovina: a case for increased awareness and education. International Journal of the Legal Profession, Vol. 21, No. 2, 319-331.
• International Association of Judges (n.d.). Website (Mission and Values).
• International Association of Prosecutors (n.d.). Website (Regional Conferences).
• International Commission of Jurists (2014). Women and the Judiciary: Geneva Forum Series 1. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.
• Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) (2013). Guarantees for the independence of justice operators. Rio de Janeiro: OAS.
• Kohen, Beatriz (2014). Gender training for the judiciary in Argentina. International Journal of the Legal Profession. Vol. 21, No. 3, 333-344.
• Minamino, Kayo (2017). Japanese judicial education: working toward gender equality in the judiciary. In: Ulrike Schultz, T. Brettel Dawson, Gisela Shaw (eds.). Gender and Judicial Education: Raising Gender Awareness of Judges. London: Routledge, 43-52.
• Open Society Institute (2008). Promoting prosecutorial accountability, independence and effectiveness. Budapest: Open Society Institute Press.
• Organisation of African Unity (1986). African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights . Nairobi: OAU, Article 7 and 26
• Organization of American States (1969). American Convention on Human Rights . Costa Rica: OAS, Article 8.
• Owor, Maureen and Musoke, Harriet D. (2017). Neglect of gender questions at the vocational stage of judicial education in Uganda, International Journal of the Legal Profession, vol. 21, No. 3, 281-296.
• Parau, Cristina E. (2011). The Drive for Judicial Supremacy. In: A. Seibert-Fohr, eds. Judicial Independence in Transition. Heidelberg: Springer.
• Russell, Peter H and O'Brien David M. (2001). Judicial Independence in the Age of Democracy. Virgina: University Press of Virginia.
• SAARC (2011). Charter of Democracy . Kathmandu: SAARC.
• Sajó, Andras (2004). Judicial integrity. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Shapiro, Martin (1981). Courts: A Political and Comparative Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Shapiro, Martin (2013). Judicial independence: new challenges in established nations. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, vol. 20, No. 1, 253-277.
• Shetreet, Shimon and Turenne, Sophie (2013). Judges on trial: The independence and accountability of the English judiciary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Slaughter, A. M. (2004). A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Solomon, Peter H. Jr. (2001). Courts in Russia, Independence, power and accountability. In: A. Sajó, eds. Judicial integrity. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Stone Sweet, Alec (2000). Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Supreme Court of the Philippines (2004). New Code of Judicial Code of Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary : A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC
• Thomas, Lord Justice (2007). Councils for the judiciary - States without a High Council: Preliminary report. Strasbourg: Consultative Council of European Judges and Council of Europe.
• Thomas, Lord Justice (2008). Guide to judicial conduct. London: Judiciary of England and Wales.
• Transparency International (2017). Global Corruption Barometer. Berlin: Transparency International.
• Transparency International Romania (2015). Integrity, independence and the accountability of the judiciary . Bucharest: Transparency International.
• United Kingdom (2005). Constitutional Reform Act. London: UK Parliament.
• United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights , GA Resolution 217A. New York: UN, Article 10.
• United Nations (1976). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , GA Resolution 2200A (XXI). New York: UN, Article 14.
• United Nations (1985). Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary , GA Resolution 40/32 and 40/146. New York: UN.
• United Nations Development Program (2015). A transparent and accountable judiciary to deliver justice for all . New York: UNDP.
• United Nations Human Rights Council (2013). Independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors and the independence of lawyers , A/HRC/RES/23/6. New York: UN. United Nations.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2019). Global Judicial Integrity Network Podcast: Preventing Gender Bias in the Judiciary . Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2019). Global Judicial Integrity Network Podcast: Women's Access to Justice . Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2018). Global Judicial Integrity Network Podcast: Judges' Use of Social Media . Vienna: UNODC
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2018). Global Judicial Integrity Network Podcast: Training Judges on Social Media Use .
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2018). Social media: a challenging new platform for judges around the world. Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2015). UNCAC: Implementation Guide and Evaluative Framework for Article 11 . Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2014). Handbook on effective prosecution responses to violence against women and girls . New York: UN.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2011). Resource Guide on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Capacity . Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2007). Commentary on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial conduct . Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2002). The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct . Vienna: UNODC.
• United Nations (2004). Convention Against Corruption , GA Resolution 58/4. New York: UN.
• United Nations Security Council (2004). The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post Conflict Societies . New York: Report of the Secretary-General.
• Volkov, Vadim and Dzmitryieva, Aryna (2015). Recruitment patterns, gender, and professional subcultures of the judiciary in Russia. International Journal of the Legal Profession, vol. 22, No. 2, 166-192.
• Watanabe, Chihara (2017). Introducing gender training in judicial education in Japan to support the judiciary. In: Ulrike Schultz, T. Brettel Dawson, Gisela Shaw (eds.). Gender and Judicial Education: Raising Gender Awareness of Judges London: Routledge, 53-64.
• World Bank (2011). World Development Report: Conflict, security and development . Washington D.C.: World Bank.
• World Bank (2012). The World Bank: New Directions in Justice Reform . Washington D.C.: World Bank.
• World Economic Forum (2013). The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014 . Geneva: WEF.

Next: Exercises

Back to top