Arguments trying to support with a purpose the extreme immunity for judges from being sued seems to be generally concentrating on freeing the judge from fear of consequences of those potential lawsuits.
First, like I said earlier, that pressure applies in every profession but it was never an excuse for immunity.
Second, why would having such a potential for accountability not be more of a reason for behaving correctly instead?
Third why would any honest judge need the level of immunity being suggested which include allowing him to do his job not in good faith? If anyone does then he shouldn't be in a position of a judge to begin with. The moral dilemma in assigning such person to the position of a judge is like assigning to the position of being a guard someone who thinks that he may find it difficult to control himself from pulling the trigger for no reason.
How far could the judges in my case, for example, wonder in their mind in order to accidentally stumble on the bad actions they did? Unless they are acting in bad faith, it is hard to see a limit for that.
No comments:
Post a Comment