Judicial Accountability: The Eternal Dilemma

Judicial integrity: the accountability gap and the Bangalore Principles

The judiciary needs to be independent of outside influence, particularly from political and economic powers. But judicial independence does not mean that judges and court officials should have free rein to behave as they please. Indeed, judicial independence is founded on public trust, and to maintain it, judges must uphold the highest standards of integrity. This chapter focuses on the account...

Health technology appraisal and the courts: accountability for reasonableness and the judicial model of procedural justice.

Recommendations issued by agencies undertaking appraisals of health technologies at the national level may impact upon the availability of certain treatments and services in some publicly funded health systems, and, as such, have regularly been subject to challenge, including by way of litigation. In addition to expertise in the evaluation of evidence, fairness of procedures has been identified...

Physician engagement and shared accountability. Buzzwords, dilemma or choice?

Judicial Accountability to the Past, Present, and Future: Precedent, Politics and Power

Interbranch Accountability in State Government and the Constitutional Requirement of Judicial Independence

When contemporary commentators decry what they describe as growing threats to “judicial independence,” they typically invoke “judicial independence” as a normative ideal—an institutional virtue. That virtue is the capacity of courts to protect individual rights, to police structural limits on governmental power, and to decide individual disputes based solely on the applicable law and the factua...