POLI 330 FINAL EXAM COMBINRD
SET QUESTIONS WITH 100%
VERIFIED ANSWERS
Internal judicial independence - Answer-Independence of judges from judicial superiors
within the judicial hierarchy
- to what extent are judges independent in reaching their decisions from guidelines and
direct interference by judges from the higher court
Institutional level analysis of judicial independence - Answer-- think of it as an
institutional feature of the judiciary
- looks at stuff like judicial control over judicial careers (appointing, promoting, etc)
- also looks at budgets (control over own livelihood)
- RUSSELL READING
Advantages to the Institutional level analysis of judicial independence - Answer-- easy
to measure
- reforms to maximise institutional independence are straightforward
- intl programs to promote rule of law have used judicial indep in the institutional sense
b/c of easy implementation
Disadvantages to the Institutional level analysis of judicial independence - Answer-- not
intrinsically valuable
- rule of law does not say courts have to be self governing
- evidence shows that the way in which countries structure institutionally their judiciaries
has LITTLE effect on how they function
- RUSSELL: behaviour follows from institution
Behaviour level analysis of judiciary independence - Answer-When jduges can act upon
their own interpretation of the law/ case, rather than someone else = behav. indep. from
other actors
- unit is the judge
- indep. judiciary = judges who adjudicate consistently to their OWN interpretation of the
law
Way to measure the behaviour level analysis of judiciary independence - Answer-(1)
opinion surveys- asked the level of extra-judicial interference- can be tricky
(2) career tracing- comparing success of judges who rule in favour against politically
powerful plaintiffs vs those who rule against- not good for measure in countries in
development
,Disadvantages of the behaviour level analysis of judiciary independence - Answer--
normative danger, judges are rarely accountable, if they act without restraint there is
alot of personal bias
- assumes that judges are acting in good faith/not to maximize own interest
Judicial output analysis of judicial independence - Answer-independent judiciary= no
litigant can win each case that they want
- judicial output is distributed in terms of maximizing someone else's preferences
- unit of analysis is individual decisions
Reputational indices as a measure of judicial output - Answer-these are surveys done
on litigants on how they perceive the independence of the courts
- about how they feel about the outcome
- whether the courts are subservient or independent of extra judicial influence
Disadvantages of reputational indices as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- it is
simply someones perception of what the situation is
- may be skewed/not accurate of reality
- people may be afraid to give true opinion in repressive countries (surveying experts=
potential solution but then they only have knowledge of a few countries)
Win-rates as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- count how many times the
government wins when they go to court
- compare the success of the gvmt as litigant vs the average litigant
Advantages of win-rates as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- tied to the idea of
rule of law
Disadvantages of win-rates as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- labour intensive
(requires
the collection of massive amounts of data on individual court cases)
- requires accountability for all other possibilities
- makes arriving at a measure cross-nationally/ crosstime very not likely
Problems with judicial accountability - Answer-- Institutional reforms aimed at
introducing accountability for judges get attacked by judges
themselves as reforms that curtail their independence
- where judicial corruption might be a prob. may be difficult
Jurisdiction as an element of judicial power - Answer-- imp element
- wider the jurisdiction, the bigger potential to become a powerful court
- not enough to guarantee a powerful court
Discretion as an element of judicial power - Answer-- less discretion = less power
- range of options would be more limited
- determined by guidelines from higher courts
, Authority of courts (compliance) as an element of judicial power - Answer-- have to
adopt certain decisions
- can have wide jurisdiction but if not respected then not powerful
- easy to tell whether theres compliance or not
How can courts get around compliance? - Answer-- by passing same law over and over
again with slightly diffeent wording
- Claiming that you intend to comply and put off the compliance until the compliance is
no longer in the public attention
- Put off by insisting that there are other reasons preventing you from implementing it
Is compliance a real issue? - Answer-YES, non-compliance can really hurt the
legitimacy of a court
- it can undermine the sense that this is an institutional that matters, is consequential,
and has to be paid attention to
- High courts are often very concerned about the question of compliance because it is
directly related to how they perceive their power to be developing
Growing trend towards the judicialization of politics - Answer-meaning the growing
importance of the judiciaary in which politics operates
- const. courts have popped up since WWII
2 elements of the judicialization of politics - Answer-(1) global expansion of policy
making power of JUDGES at the expense of politicians and bureaucrats
(2) rise of activist const. courts as opposed to restrained courts
Restrain court - Answer-- negative legislator (only decide what leg's are
unconstitutional)
- invalidates laws as a last resort
- stays away from consequential/debated legislation aka leaves it to the politicians
- will leave a law in place even if it can be viewed by others as unconstitutional
Activist court - Answer-- not afraid to invalidate imp. central laws
- doesn't care about legislative intent
Why is comparing restraint courts vs activists courts problematic? - Answer-- is only an
academic construct
- no checklist/fullproof way to know that a court is one or the other
- courts can vary over time
Signs a court is an activist court - Answer-- balancing jurisprudence (overreaches for
justification for decisions, moving away from the legal arguments)
- avoid using concrete legal norms
- when a court tries to get a bigger jurisdiction
- when a ruling rests on vague const. values
SET QUESTIONS WITH 100%
VERIFIED ANSWERS
Internal judicial independence - Answer-Independence of judges from judicial superiors
within the judicial hierarchy
- to what extent are judges independent in reaching their decisions from guidelines and
direct interference by judges from the higher court
Institutional level analysis of judicial independence - Answer-- think of it as an
institutional feature of the judiciary
- looks at stuff like judicial control over judicial careers (appointing, promoting, etc)
- also looks at budgets (control over own livelihood)
- RUSSELL READING
Advantages to the Institutional level analysis of judicial independence - Answer-- easy
to measure
- reforms to maximise institutional independence are straightforward
- intl programs to promote rule of law have used judicial indep in the institutional sense
b/c of easy implementation
Disadvantages to the Institutional level analysis of judicial independence - Answer-- not
intrinsically valuable
- rule of law does not say courts have to be self governing
- evidence shows that the way in which countries structure institutionally their judiciaries
has LITTLE effect on how they function
- RUSSELL: behaviour follows from institution
Behaviour level analysis of judiciary independence - Answer-When jduges can act upon
their own interpretation of the law/ case, rather than someone else = behav. indep. from
other actors
- unit is the judge
- indep. judiciary = judges who adjudicate consistently to their OWN interpretation of the
law
Way to measure the behaviour level analysis of judiciary independence - Answer-(1)
opinion surveys- asked the level of extra-judicial interference- can be tricky
(2) career tracing- comparing success of judges who rule in favour against politically
powerful plaintiffs vs those who rule against- not good for measure in countries in
development
,Disadvantages of the behaviour level analysis of judiciary independence - Answer--
normative danger, judges are rarely accountable, if they act without restraint there is
alot of personal bias
- assumes that judges are acting in good faith/not to maximize own interest
Judicial output analysis of judicial independence - Answer-independent judiciary= no
litigant can win each case that they want
- judicial output is distributed in terms of maximizing someone else's preferences
- unit of analysis is individual decisions
Reputational indices as a measure of judicial output - Answer-these are surveys done
on litigants on how they perceive the independence of the courts
- about how they feel about the outcome
- whether the courts are subservient or independent of extra judicial influence
Disadvantages of reputational indices as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- it is
simply someones perception of what the situation is
- may be skewed/not accurate of reality
- people may be afraid to give true opinion in repressive countries (surveying experts=
potential solution but then they only have knowledge of a few countries)
Win-rates as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- count how many times the
government wins when they go to court
- compare the success of the gvmt as litigant vs the average litigant
Advantages of win-rates as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- tied to the idea of
rule of law
Disadvantages of win-rates as a measure of judicial output - Answer-- labour intensive
(requires
the collection of massive amounts of data on individual court cases)
- requires accountability for all other possibilities
- makes arriving at a measure cross-nationally/ crosstime very not likely
Problems with judicial accountability - Answer-- Institutional reforms aimed at
introducing accountability for judges get attacked by judges
themselves as reforms that curtail their independence
- where judicial corruption might be a prob. may be difficult
Jurisdiction as an element of judicial power - Answer-- imp element
- wider the jurisdiction, the bigger potential to become a powerful court
- not enough to guarantee a powerful court
Discretion as an element of judicial power - Answer-- less discretion = less power
- range of options would be more limited
- determined by guidelines from higher courts
, Authority of courts (compliance) as an element of judicial power - Answer-- have to
adopt certain decisions
- can have wide jurisdiction but if not respected then not powerful
- easy to tell whether theres compliance or not
How can courts get around compliance? - Answer-- by passing same law over and over
again with slightly diffeent wording
- Claiming that you intend to comply and put off the compliance until the compliance is
no longer in the public attention
- Put off by insisting that there are other reasons preventing you from implementing it
Is compliance a real issue? - Answer-YES, non-compliance can really hurt the
legitimacy of a court
- it can undermine the sense that this is an institutional that matters, is consequential,
and has to be paid attention to
- High courts are often very concerned about the question of compliance because it is
directly related to how they perceive their power to be developing
Growing trend towards the judicialization of politics - Answer-meaning the growing
importance of the judiciaary in which politics operates
- const. courts have popped up since WWII
2 elements of the judicialization of politics - Answer-(1) global expansion of policy
making power of JUDGES at the expense of politicians and bureaucrats
(2) rise of activist const. courts as opposed to restrained courts
Restrain court - Answer-- negative legislator (only decide what leg's are
unconstitutional)
- invalidates laws as a last resort
- stays away from consequential/debated legislation aka leaves it to the politicians
- will leave a law in place even if it can be viewed by others as unconstitutional
Activist court - Answer-- not afraid to invalidate imp. central laws
- doesn't care about legislative intent
Why is comparing restraint courts vs activists courts problematic? - Answer-- is only an
academic construct
- no checklist/fullproof way to know that a court is one or the other
- courts can vary over time
Signs a court is an activist court - Answer-- balancing jurisprudence (overreaches for
justification for decisions, moving away from the legal arguments)
- avoid using concrete legal norms
- when a court tries to get a bigger jurisdiction
- when a ruling rests on vague const. values
