Should judges be elected, appointed, or selected on merit - Essay Example

Judges selection is often through three main ways: election, direct appointment and/or merit (Glick & Emmert, 1987). These are important mechanisms that are designed to provide the judicial system with independent and accountable judiciary. But none of these selection methods have proved be totally free of outside pressure and hence the debate. The independence of judiciary is important issue that often comes under shroud. The states are either following hybrid method of selection or reforming their method to come up with the best way of selecting judges who can both be held accountable as well as are immune to outside pressure.

I believe that the merit based selection of judges is best as it would primarily rely on its legal expertise for judgment leading to sentencing. The role of judges is paramount in the legal arena. The need for independence in imposing sentences in offences becomes a crucial issue. The accountability to public opinion in cases directly linked to public welfare is an issue that frequently influences the selection pattern or raises controversy. The responsiveness to public opinion is deemed important but at the same time, the need to remain within the broader precinct of law and constitution is integral part of justice.

The judges who are selected through merit are prone to follow law and their judgment and sentences are based on legal statutes and clauses that cut across race, color, culture and socio-political leanings (O’Connor, 2010). This is fundamental to justice system that is not influenced by outside pressure, be it public opinion. The merit system of selection is also commendable because it ensures that selection of judges is done through a nominating committee which comprises of eminent lawyers and non lawyers of public repute.

The list of judges is forwarded to governor who appoints a judge from the list for a defined period. The second term of the judge is through election which the public can appropriately elect if it finds his/her performance up to its expectations. This is a critical parameter that gives public the right to oust the judge if the performance evaluation or the meritocracy level of judgment is found to be below par. Most importantly, the merit based selection promotes independence in judiciary that discourages political interference and undue pressure that could influence justice (Cann, 2007).

It also helps to appoint judges from sectors like minority and women who may otherwise be sidetracked by the vested interests. It also gives equal opportunities to people from small town as well as big cities. The need to promote merit based selection therefore hugely becomes desirable. While the elected judges tend to politicize judiciary through their political linkages, merit based judiciary system favors unbiased justice that is based on law. The well qualified and experienced judges are more inclined towards non partisan conviction that corroborates conviction or sentencing with the degree of seriousness of the crime.

One can therefore conclude that the merit based selection of judges is best. It balances independence with accountability. At the same time, it encourages selection of the judges from all segment of society that in itself promotes social justices cutting across race, color and gender.(words: 525)ReferenceCann, Damon. (March-April, 2007) Beyond accountability and independence: Judicial selection and state court performance. JUDICATURE, 90(5); 226-232.Henry Glick & Craig Emmert. (December-January, 1987) Selection System and Judicial Characteristics: The Recruitment of State Supreme Court Judges, JUDICATURE, 70; 228-235.

O’Connor, Sandra Day. (May 22, 2010). Take Justice off the Ballot. The New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/opinion/23oconnor.html