Volume 17, Issue 1 (2013)
CLR 2013, 17(1): 121-144 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Azizi1* I, Amiri2 M, Vijeh3 M R. On the Effect of the Modus Operandi of “Judge Selection” on Judicial Independence in the Unites States’ legal System with an Eye to Iran’s Legal System. CLR 2013; 17 (1) :121-144
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-7677-en.html
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-7677-en.html
1- 1. Assistant Professor, Ministry of Science, Research & Technology, Tehran, Iran
2- 2. Ph.D. student, Department of Public and International Law, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- 3. Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allame Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran
2- 2. Ph.D. student, Department of Public and International Law, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- 3. Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allame Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (7330 Views)
The present study involved a critical investigation of typical judge selection approaches in the legal system of the United States of America (USA), comparatively mapping the results onto Iran’s legal system. The results indicated that despite being a political process, the US’ M.O. of federal judge selection has no consequences for the judges’ procedural independence, owing to the prevailing security of tenure. Like-wise, notwithstanding the judicial independence-related problems and challenges it has effected, state-level judge selection has brought about promising prospects, as evident in the reluctance of the US’s legal system to set aside judicial election procedures. Also the comparative study of the US’s and Iran’s legal systems revealed that the political and beliefs-related prerequisites pre-ordained in the prospective judges’ qualifications list and judge appointment approaches by the Iranian policy-making body has, on the one hand, served to deny Iranian judges’ rights for democratic functioning, and left them owing to key political figures, on the other.
Received: 2012/06/25 | Accepted: 2013/05/4 | Published: 2013/05/22
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |