PUBLIC SUPPORT

The third of my ingredients for judicial independence is its general acceptance. On this there is little to say except that it depends very largely upon the support of public opinion, without which die independence of die Judiciary must inevitably be in grave danger.

The layman, as much as the lawyer, knows full well that, to quote Sir Winston Churchill, ‘the principle of the complete independence of the Judiciary from the Executive is the foundation of many things in our island life. It has been widely imitated in varying degrees throughout the free world. It is perhaps one of the deepest gulfs between us and all forms of totalitarian rule... The British Judiciary, with its traditions and record, is one of the greatest living assets of our race and people and the independence of the Judiciary is a part of our message to the evergrowing world which is rising so swiftly around us’.¹

In the United Kingdom, public opinion is given a lead by the rule observed by Parliament that, unless discussion is based on a sub­stantive motion, drawn in proper terms, reflection must not be cast in debate upon the conduct of Judges, either individually or generally.¹

* Hansard, March 23, 1954, Vol. 525, Cols. 1061, 1063.

’ Erskine May, Parliamentary Practice, 16th edn. pp. 380,457-8. See also the Speaker’s ruling regarding the Chief Justice of Seychelles in Hansard, July 30, 1956, Vol. 557, Cols. 925 to 932.

A similar rule is observed in other parts of the Commonwealth. It has been made statutory in some constitutions.¹