The Secretary -General of the Renewal Party, Kennis, posted on Facebook on the 25th that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice could affect the performance of the performance of specific judges of the High Court.
Kennis claims without any reasonable or legal basis that judges may decide cases according to individuals and money, not case facts and applicable laws.
No surprise, the official sends a correction instructions to Kennes in a timely manner by preventing online fake information and online manipulation law office (POFMA).This is the seventh time he has received correction instructions.
The importance of judicial independence
The integrity, independence, and justice of the judicial department is important to effectively promote and protect our rights, especially basic freedom, law and order, economic development, and rule of law.This is why judicial independence is very important. The misunderstanding and slander of it will only harm our collective interests.
The public's trust in the judicial system and judicial departments, moral authority and integrity play a key role in Singapore's growth and development in Singapore in the past 60 years.
Singapore has a highly respected and effective judicial department at home and abroad.For example, in the 2023 World Competitiveness Annual Report published by the Lausanne International Management Development Institute (IMD), Singapore ranks fourth in the world in rule of law.
Undeenal allegations of the judicial department have undergone the difficulty of the public's difficulty in the judicial system.
Maintenance of judicial independence
Fundamentally, judicial independence involves the institutional background and psychological state of judges when judging legal disputes.According to the Constitution, the judge must make an independent decision based on the judgment of the facts of the case and the sincere understanding of the law, and is not directly or indirectly affected, induced, stressed, threatened or out of any reason from any aspect or for any reason.put one's oar in.
Therefore, the judge has the support of the constitution, and the Constitution provides a guarantee for the independence of judicial, including the appointment, term and exemption of judges.
The Supreme Court judge is appointed by the president, and the president has the right to decide whether to agree with the candidates proposed by the Prime Minister (Article 95).The president must agree with such appointments to ensure that only qualified people can work (Section 22).The Supreme Court judges enjoy the term of office. Until the age of 65, the salary is protected by the Constitution and cannot be adjusted (98 (1A) and (8) sections).
The position of the Judge of the Supreme Court is protected by the Constitution and shall not be revoked during the term of office (section 98 (1)).Only after a special court consisting of at least five predecessors or current judges under the circumstances of inconsistent behavior or unable to perform duties, after a strict review of peer review can the president be removed from office (Article 98 (3) and (4) sections.Article).
In addition, the Constitution restricts the behavior of Congress discussing the actions of the Supreme Court judge, unless there are at least a quarter of parliament members of the parliament proposed (Article 99 Article 99).
The Constitution also authorizes the legislation of Congress to determine the salary of the Supreme Court judge (section 98 (6)).The 1994 judge salary law stipulates the framework, allowance, and welfare framework that the Supreme Court judge can enjoy as a group.
Some people have proposed whether the judge's salary law allows the cabinet to influence how the judges have decided.
According to the judge's salary law, the prime minister or any minister cannot determine the actual salary, allowance and benefits of each judge.We must put the judge's salary law and the Constitution's guarantee measures for judicial independence to interpret and understand.
According to the framework of the judge's salary law, it is decided to pay the specific salary and redness paid by the judge of each Supreme Court.Any minister's decision or the specific salary that affects the specific judge will violate the principles of judicial independence.
As a result, the chief judge decided to decide the specific salary of each Supreme Court judge, but it must not exceed the scope or upper limit set by the minister to the group of judges of this group.After being appointed as the Supreme Court judge, only the chief judge can adjust the salary of the Supreme Court judge and other employment conditions, but it is not allowed to adjust it to it.
There are other legislative and ordinary laws (understandable as laws formulated by judges) that allow judges, including judges of the National Court, to fulfill their duties in fairness, fearless and selflessly.This includes not being prosecuted for whether to perform judicial duties.
The threat of the judicial accountability system and the facts of the truth
In addition to the design of the system, the judge's integrity and character are also essential for judicial independence.Strict selection of judges cannot be compromised.The judicial accountability system can cultivate people's trust and confidence in the judicial department through the highest standards of independence and integrity, and strengthen judicial independence.
The judicial department must ensure and maintain the public's trust in the court.Singapore Supreme Court judges and judicial rules of judicial behavior stipulate: "When judges make personal decisions, they must always show independence, ensure that judicial departments are independent as a whole, and maintain the public's views on judicial independence."The judge must perform the judicial functions as "do his best, not fear, no bare, no hate".
False accusation for judicial independence will weaken people's trust in the judicial department.Chief Justice Mei Dushun once talked about the harmful effects of "the proliferation of false information and the depreciation of the truth in the public discourse" or "Truth Decay"; the court as the "reliable truth seeker and the" reliable truth seeker andThe truth investigators "are not spared.
Since the truth is the foundation of the court's work, the court's decision must be legitimated and is accepted by the public domain as the general reflection of the truth.Last year, Mida Shun warned: "If the judge was accused and unfair allegations when performing his duties, such as accusing their ruling only reflect their personal preferences, which will seriously damage the court's legitimacy."
Judicial independence is not imagination
From the perspective of individuals or systems, judicial independence is a prerequisite for the rule of law and the basic guarantee of fair interrogation.时任首席大法官陈锡强在2010年的一篇文章中指出，持续的司法独立本身不是目的，而是实现其他目的的手段：“没有独立的司法部门就不可能有法治，反之亦然，但有After these two, there will be security, law and order, and stability.
A unique judicial department will not be able to fulfill its constitutional duties.This will make the foundation of democracy and the prosperity of the rule of law.In November 1995, Li Guangyao, then the cabinet, said in the Congress to participate in the debate of the independence and fair discussion on the Singapore's judicial system in Congress: "However, when the government, including me, submit the case to the court for trial, or the government is individual by individuals by individualsWhen prosecution, the court must consider the words of both parties and strictly make a judgment based on the law.
The core of this series of system guarantees and related norms is judicial independence, and the priority is to strengthen and protect justice.Our system helps to ensure that individual judges and judicial departments will make unfair rulings due to unfair impact, sanctioning threats or reward commitments.
Singapore's judicial independence should not be just imagination, but to be the principle of the Singaporean government and governance system.In the final analysis, Singapore's judicial independence requires the joint efforts of various government departments and Singaporeans.
The author is an associate professor of Yang Bangxiao Law School of Singapore Management University
Golden Shun Translation
