0
Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae delivers opening remarks at the 2025 Sejong International Conference in Seoul on September 22. / Source: Yonhap News

At the 2025 Sejong International Conference in Seoul, senior judges from Italy and Australia stressed that the independence of the judiciary is a prerequisite for democracy and the rule of law.

Stefano Moggini, a justice of Italy’s Supreme Court, said in his presentation on the “elements of sustainable justice” that judicial independence is a fundamental right of citizens. Italy maintains the High Council of the Judiciary (CSM), an autonomous body that oversees the appointment and careers of judges and prosecutors. Composed of more than 30 members, including the president, chief justice, prosecutor general, legal experts, and elected judicial representatives, the council ensures that over two-thirds of its members come from the bench.

Citing Articles 101 and 104 of the Italian Constitution, which declare that “judicial power is exercised in the name of the people” and “judges are subject only to the law,” Moggini said independence is guaranteed both from external political pressure and internally in case assignments and judicial discretion. “Without an independent judiciary, there can be no rule of law, nor can sustainable justice be realized,” he emphasized.

Julie Ward, chief justice of New South Wales in Australia, also underscored the judiciary’s role in checking legislative power in an interview after the conference. Responding to a question on whether Australia’s legislature wields superiority over the judiciary, Ward noted that the two branches serve wholly distinct roles: lawmakers enact statutes, while courts interpret and apply them.

In Australia, justices of the High Court are formally appointed by the governor-general on the advice of the cabinet, a structure designed to preserve institutional balance. Each state also maintains its own independent court system. Ward explained that while courts must abide by statutes, legislatures are constrained when they pass unconstitutional laws, as judicial review can strike them down. “The greatest check on legislative power lies with the judiciary,” she said.

Ward added that in New South Wales, a judicial commission reviews complaints against judges’ conduct, separate from case outcomes, and can recommend removal to parliament. However, she voiced concern that oversight mechanisms remain relatively weak. “Most judges serve until age 70, and removal requires a parliamentary vote. If a judge commits misconduct, immediate accountability should fall to the government,” she said.

She also acknowledged a decline in public trust: “Anti-government groups who deny the legitimacy of government or claim no duty to obey national law often show no faith in the judiciary. While the courts are respected, public confidence in them has somewhat eroded in recent years.”