An independent and impartial judiciary is fundamental to the existence and operation of a liberal democracy. Focussing on Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States, this comparative 2011 study explores four major issues affecting the judicial institution. These issues relate to the appointment and discipline of judges; judges and freedom of speech; the performance of non-judicial functions by judges; and judicial bias and recusal, and each is set within the context of the importance of maintaining public confidence in the judiciary. The essays highlight important episodes or controversies affecting members of the judiciary to illustrate relevant principles.

This book is the first application of the comparative method to the analysis of both the basic features of judicial process and their evolution and profound transformation in Europe and America. Cappelletti discusses the challenges facing the courts of justice and other adjudicatory agencies, and evaluates the solutions adopted by contemporary legal systems.

World Bank Technical Paper no. 430.QUOTEMany countries are undertaking legal and judicial reforms as part of their overall development programs; there is increasing recognition that economic and social progress requires consolidation of democracy as well as respect for the rule of law and human rights; without these development is not sustainable.QUOTEMany developing countries find that their judiciaries are inconsistent in conflict resolution and carry a large backlog of cases, thus stifling private-sector growth, eroding individual and property rights, and perhaps even violating human rights. Delays affect both the fairness and the efficiency of the system. They impede the public's access to the courts, which, in effect, weakens democracies, the rule of law and the ability to enforce human rights. This paper aims to describe and explain the performance of court systems in a sample of developing and developed countries in order to provide data to those designing or evaluating reforms. The study also seeks to show areas in which international comparison of judicial performance can be fruitful, suggesting indicators that can be used in such comparisons. Finally, it endeavors to provide comparisons of performance within individual countries over time.

Human Rights and Judicial Review: A Comparative Perspective collects, in one volume, a basic description of the most important principles and methods of analysis followed by the major Courts enforcing constitutional Bills of Rights around the world. The Courts include the Supreme Courts of Japan, India, Canada and the United States, the Constitutional Courts of Germany and Italy and the European Court of Human Rights. Each chapter is devoted to an analysis of the substantive jurisprudence developed by these Courts to determine whether a challenged law is constitutional or not, and is written by members of these Courts who have had a prior academic career. The book highlights the similarities and differences in the analytical methods used by these courts in determining whether or not someone's constitutional rights have been violated. Students and scholars of constitutional law and human rights, judges and advocates engaged in constitutional litigation will find the book a unique and valuable resource.

The theme of this book is judicial activism in industrialized democracies, with a chapter on the changing political roles of the courts in the Soviet Union. Eleven contributors describe the extent to which the highest courts in their country of expertise have embraced the making of public policy.

This volume compares the different conceptions of the rule of law that have developed in different legal cultures. It describes the social purposes and practical applications of the rule of law and how it might be improved in the varied circumstances.