GA, draft, Independent judiciary principles

[Simone]

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting the importance of an independent judiciary enshrined in previous GARs (37, 198, 466, 580);

Desiring to reinforce the independence of the said judiciary through a separate resolution;

1. Hereby defines:
   • IAO to mean the WA Independent Adjudicative Office;
   • judges to mean anyone adjudicating a dispute, criminal or otherwise, as part of the judiciary;
   • judiciary to mean the entire judicial (and/or court) systems of a WA state;
   • WASO to mean the WACC WA Solicitors Office;
2. Hereby declares:
   • that each WA state must guarantee the independence of its judiciary, by constitution (or by an analogous instrument);
   • that each WA state must separate the judiciary from the institutions of its executive, administrative, legislature, and that of its bodies in charge of national or civil defense, policing, prosecution, internal audit and inspectorate functions; and at all levels of national and sub-national governments;
   • that all agencies of each WA state must observe the independence of the judiciary of its own WA state, as well as the judiciary of other WA states;
   • that the right to a fair trial is paramount in a judicial process and that all parties to a trial (including but not limited to defendant(s), plaintiff(s), prosecutor(s) and witness(es)) are entitled to such rights without prejudice;
3. Hereby requires:
   • that all matters before a judiciary should be decided impartially, strictly according to facts, all WA resolutions, and all laws of the said WA state; without bias, improper influences, interventions, intimidations or restrictions of any kind, from anyone or for any reason;
   • that the judiciary shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature and to determine whether an issue submitted is judicial in nature, unless the subject matter has been, prior to hearing, defined by the constitution (or by an analogous instrument) of a WA state as a purely political matter, and subject to a transparent political process;
   • that no tribunal established can displace a judiciary, whether for civilian or military purposes;
   • that each WA state must provide sufficient funding for a functional judiciary, including reasonable compensation for all judges in accordance with the economic system(s) of that WA state;
   • that each WA state must use its utmost efforts to prevent corruption and trans-national threats to the independence of its judiciary;
   • that each WA state must provide such transparency and disclosures as it can, to the maximum extent possible, regarding;
     • the organization, administration, selection and compensation of judges, juries (if any) and representatives of both plaintiffs and defendants, and any potential conflicts of interest;
     • all judicial rulings, subject to privacy rules applicable to that WA state;
   • that all judges must:
     • be selected solely on their qualifications, experience and integrity;
     • be required to make decisions independently based solely on the merits of the matter pending;
     • be subject to decisions on employment and advancement solely on merit;
     • not be subject to removal or discipline except in cases subject to due process, and in accordance with national and/or sub-national laws, and if such decisions are political in nature, subject to accountability in a transparent process;
     • no judicial decision can be revised by a political process on an ex post facto basis to the detriment of any defendant;
4. Hereby mandates:
   • the IAO to appoint such rapporteurs to inspect, evaluate and report on the independence of a judiciary of a WA state, and to publish such findings according to established WA procedures;
   • the IAO to provide such mandatory training and continuing education as the IAO deems fit to judges of a WA state from time to time and at the discretion of the IAO, and for WASO to provide such analogous training to representatives of a plaintiff or a defendant, both in conjunction with the competent authorities of a WA state;
5. Hereby clarifies:
   • that this resolution does not interfere with a WA state’s system for granting clemency or pardons, mediation and/or arbitration according to its own process(es);
   • that this resolution does not prohibit the use of elections for selection of judges, nor impose conditions on the political affiliation and political activities of judges.