Principles and Propositions for Realizing a New Model of Sustainable Judicial Governance: Lessons from a Comparative Study of the Judicial Systems of the United States, the United Kingdom, China, France, and Germany
Subject Areas : حکمرانی قضاییSeyyed Samsameddin Qavami 1 , Nima Norouzi 2
1 - Director of the Islamic Management Jurisprudence Foundation and External Lecturer, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran
2 - Department of Jurisprudence and Private Law, Faculty of Sciences and Knowledge, Al-Mustafa International University, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran
Keywords: sustainable judicial governance, judicial independence, institutional transparency, inclusive justice, comparative study, discourse-building,
Abstract :
The realization of sustainable judicial governance requires structural, cultural, and institutional reforms capable of simultaneously guaranteeing judicial independence, transparency, accountability, and social justice. Adopting a comparative approach, this article examines five countries—the United States, the United Kingdom, China, France, and Germany—as cases with differing legal and institutional contexts. The findings indicate that the United States enjoys a high degree of judicial independence but weak institutional cohesion; the United Kingdom, with its common law tradition and independent institutions, has achieved high social legitimacy, yet limited financial resources threaten comprehensive justice; China, through institutional centralization and technological innovation, has increased efficiency, but the independence of judges is constrained; France emphasizes social justice and administrative cohesion but exhibits lower local flexibility; and Germany has managed to offer a balanced model of independence, transparency, and cohesion. Ultimately, the article introduces twelve key principles—including structural transparency, meaningful participation, merit-based selection, financial transparency, clear delegation of duties, open communication, definition of responsibilities, a unified institutional voice, financial independence, positive inter-institutional relations, case management, and discourse-building—as a framework for sustainable judicial governance. This framework can serve as a guide for countries seeking to integrate international experiences with local conditions.
Becker, D., & Durham, C. M. (2010). A case for court governance principles. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.
Chowdhury, N. (2016). Sustainable development as environmental justice: Exploring judicial discourse in India. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 3(2), 321–344. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2016.12
Dreyfus, M. (2013). The judiciary’s role in environmental governance: The case of Delhi. Environmental Policy and Law, 43(3), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.3233/EPL-130017
Ferejohn, J., & Kramer, L. D. (2002). Independent judges, dependent judiciary: Institutionalizing judicial restraint. NYU Law Review, 77(4), 962–1039.
Ginsburg, T. (2003). Judicial review in new democracies: Constitutional courts in Asian cases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Griller, G. A. (2010). Governing loosely coupled courts in times of economic stress. In Future Trends in State Courts 2010 (pp. 28–34). Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.
Hammergren, L. (2002). Do judicial councils further judicial reform? Lessons from Latin America. Carnegie Endowment Working Papers, 28, 1–36.
Hirschl, R. (2004). Towards juristocracy: The origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kong, H., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., & Liu, M. (2024). Exploring integrated ocean management policy in China: Evolution, challenges, and prospects. Marine Policy, 155, 106765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.106765
Kudeikina, I., & Kaija, S. (2022). Problems relating to judicial selection in the context of sustainable development. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 11(4), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2022.v11n4p115
Lefever, R. D. (2009). The integration of judicial independence and judicial administration: The role of collegiality in court governance. Court Manager, 24(2), 6–12.
Ostrom, B. J., & Hanson, R. A. (2010). Understanding court culture is key to successful court reform. In Future Trends in State Courts 2010 (pp. 19–27). Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.
Popova, M. (2010). Political competition as an obstacle to judicial independence: Evidence from Russia and Ukraine. Comparative Political Studies, 43(10), 1202–1229.
Preston, B. J. (2024). The judicial development of ecologically sustainable development. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Sadurski, W. (2008). Rights before courts: A study of constitutional courts in postcommunist states of Central and Eastern Europe. Dordrecht: Springer.
Tate, C. N., & Vallinder, T. (Eds.). (1995). The global expansion of judicial power. New York: New York University Press.
Tarr, A. G. (1981). Court unification and court performance: A preliminary assessment. Judicature, 64(8), 365–371.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 (A/RES/70/1). New York: United Nations. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
Voigt, S., & El-Bialy, N. (2015). Identifying the determinants of judicial independence: A global survey. Journal of Law and Economics, 58(4), 729–774. https://doi.org/10.1086/684303
World Bank. (2017). World development report 2017: Governance and the law. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0950-7