evaluation of Judiciary Independence

• Security of tenure.

  Superior judges have this because they cannot be dismissed by the government and can only be removed by the Monarch following a petition presented by both Houses of Parliament which gives them protection from political power. This is not however, the case for inferior judges who can be removed from office by the Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice for incapacity of misbehaviour.
• Independence from Executive

  Judges cannot be sacked for making decisions which the government do not like and s3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 states that the Lord Chancellor and other ministers must not try to influence judicial decisions. The fact that the JAC now recommends judges for appointment also helps this process.

  Brexit case: R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2016). Related to the government decision to leave the EU following the referendum without consulting Parliament. The Supreme Court -the judiciary- decided that the government could not start the process of leaving the EU without consulting Parliament and this decision was criticized by some, but the Prime Minister upheld the right of the judiciary to be independent.
• Immunity from suit.

  Judges cannot be prosecuted for anything they do whist carrying out their judicial function including being sued, as confirmed in Sirros v Moore 1975 (where a judge wrongly sent someone to prison but could not be sued for false imprisonment). They also cannot be sued for defamation for anything said about anyone during any case which gives judges independence to perform their duties without fear of consequences.
• Independence from the legislature (parliament)

  is important as judges generally are not involved in the law-making functions of parliament. Full-time judges cannot be MPS although part-time judges can. In 2009, the Supreme Court replaced the House of Lords and was given its own building and support staff and the main reason for this was to separate the judiciary from the legislature.
• Independence from the case

  Judges cannot try any case where they have an interest.

  This was confirmed in the Pinochet case (1998) where one of the judges, Lord Hoffman, who ordered the Chilean dictator's extradition, was an unpaid director of Amnesty International. The House of Lords had to allow an appeal and re-trial because judges have to be seen to be completely unbiased and Lord Hoffman's connection with a human rights organization affected this.
• Judicial independence is very important to a democracy and in protecting the rights of the individual against any unlawful acts of the state. The process of judicial review allows judges to make decisions based on the facts of a case. This enables the public to have confidence in the judicial, system.