Quest for Universal Standards of Judicial Integrity
Some Reflections on the Bangalore Principles
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12323975 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Dejo Olowu (0000-0002-8046-5398, Dejo Olowu is Research Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, at the North West University (Mafikeng Campus), Private Bag X 2046, Mmabatho 2735, South Africa., corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 179-191 |
| Publication date | 2013-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | India Quarterly A Journal of International Affairs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0974-9284 • E-ISSN: 0975-2684 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0974928413481885 |
| OpenAlex | W1969171663 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 7 |
While the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002, are not binding on states, they evidence high-level support for the principle of judicial integrity. In addition, superior courts and judiciaries of diverse legal traditions have relied on the Bangalore Principles in codifying their minimum standards of judicial integrity. Extrapolating from some of the core values of the Bangalore Principles, this article accentuates some of the critical challenges implicated in establishing credible, independent and accountable judiciaries. Beyond the task of developing appropriate mechanisms for ensuring judicial integrity, this article assesses the follow-up efforts to the Bangalore Principles, such as the draft Lusaka Measures on the Implementation of the Bangalore Principles on Judicial Conduct, 2010, contending that while these measures seek to quantify the critical elements of the Bangalore Principles, there are still areas of concern. This article addresses a plethora of pertinent questions, advocating that the mechanisms for judicial integrity should not be entirely controlled by the judiciary but be made to accommodate sufficient lay representation, and furthermore, that current codes of judicial conduct be formulated as enforceable rules and procedures in ways that would sustain public confidence in judicial processes
Economics · Judicial review · Law and economics · Management · Political science · Representation (politics · Sociology · Task (project management · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Legal principles and applications
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2024 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |