In seventeen pages this paper discusses various theoretical interpretations on judiciary structure and functions with moral values, legislation, legal positivism, and natural law among the topics examined. Eleven sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: JL5_JLjudges.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
gender, orientation and so on are not relevant to their fitness for the appointment. Amongst the criteria which are used to select judges are their legal knowledge and experience, their
intellectual capability, their communication skills, integrity and impartiality, maturity and commitment. They are also expected to have considerable personal experience of society in general: taken all in all, this means
that judges are, in theory at least, mature and balanced individuals who have risen through the legal profession and demonstrated high standards of personal integrity and fairness in the process.
Their function within the court system is to interpret the law fairly and accurately, which in some instances will
mean enforcing it as it stands and in others will mean establishing changes so that the letter of the law can be more clearly understood. Sylvester (2003) points out that
there is conflict between the judiciary and the Home Office as to the extent of the powers of the judiciary, particularly with regard to their power to overturn laws: however,
for the most part the role of the judge is to interpret legislation according to domestic and European policy. All British laws must be interpreted in the light of European
legislation: where the two conflict, national laws are subordinate to those of the EU. If judges are uncertain as to how a ruling should be made, it is possible to
apply to the European court for clarification: such clarification is then enacted into UK law.
Legal positivism is a theory which stresses the conventional element of law, in the sense that the law is derived from social conventions. Connected to the concept