Rule of Law and Judicial Accountability in Democratic States

Authors

Irma Indra Wahyuni Universitas Hang Tuah, Surabaya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54518/ldi.2.2.2024.1288

Keywords:

Accountability, Democracy, Judicial Institutions, Rule of Law, Supremacy of Law

Abstract

The principle of the rule of law places judicial institutions as one of the main pillars in ensuring legal supremacy and maintaining democratic governance. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of regulations concerning judicial independence and accountability based on the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power, and Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court as lastly amended by Law Number 3 of 2009. In addition, this study examines the urgency of discussing judicial accountability in supporting the implementation of the rule of law in democratic states. This study employs a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) method by utilizing fifteen scientific references published over the last five years and indexed by Google Scholar. The analysis is conducted using conceptual and statutory approaches. The findings indicate that the existing regulatory framework has provided an adequate foundation for an independent and accountable judiciary. Furthermore, strengthening judicial accountability plays an important role in enhancing institutional legitimacy, reinforcing checks and balances mechanisms, and building public trust in the judicial system. Therefore, maintaining a balance between independence and accountability is essential to support the realization of a democratic state governed by law and justice.

References

Berggren, N., & Gutmann, J. (2020). Securing personal freedom through institutions: The role of electoral democracy and judicial independence. European Journal of Law and Economics, 49(2), 165-186.

Durbach, A., Reinecke, I., & Dargan, L. (2020). Enabling democracy: the role of public interest litigation in sustaining and preserving the separation of powers. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 26(2), 195-208.

Geyh, C. G. (2021). The Twilight of Judicial Independence. Case Western Reserve Law Review, Forthcoming, Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper, (433).

Hayo, B., & Voigt, S. (2023). Judicial independence: Why does de facto diverge from de jure?. European Journal of Political Economy, 79, 102454.

Hecht, N., Levi, D. F., Acker, R., Spaulding, S., & Duncan, A. K. (2021). Judicial Independence: Threats Foreign and Domestic. JudiCature, 105, 12-18.

Landau, D., & Dixon, R. (2019). Abusive judicial review: courts against democracy. UC Davis Law Review, 53(3), 1313–1387.

Moliterno, J. E., & Čuroš, P. (2021). Recent attacks on judicial independence: The vulgar, the systemic, and the insidious. German Law Journal, 22(7), 1159-1191.

Nurudin, A. (2020). Upholding the impartiality of judges in judicial systems. Hasanuddin Law Review, 80-88.

Rumadhan, I. (2021). Independence of Budget Management to Realize the Independence of Judicial Institutions. Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan, 10(3), 421-442.

Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945.

Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power.

Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court as last amended by Law Number 3 of 2009 concerning the Second Amendment to Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court.

Voigt, S., & Hayo, B. (2023). Judicial Independence: Why Does De Facto Diverge from De Jure?. Available at SSRN 4330951.

Yudkivska, G. (2021). Between Scylla and Charybdis–Judicial Independence and Accountability in the Populist Era. Available at SSRN 3761164.

Downloads

Published

2024-12-30

How to Cite

Wahyuni, I. I. (2024). Rule of Law and Judicial Accountability in Democratic States. Law and Democracy Insight, 2(2), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.54518/ldi.2.2.2024.1288