In: Psychology
Which form of judicial selection do you think is best? What are the differences?
There are primarily two forms of judicial selection; election and appointment and other forms are combination of the two. People who favour election consider it to be in the spirit of democracy as the people will have a say in the third branch of governance and select their judicial representative. The second form is appointment and it also comes in various forms; in some systems the chief executive decides and appoints the judge. Generally, the judge is appointed on the basis of "merit selection". A commission identifies the well-qualified candidate and then afterwards the chief executive chooses a judge from the list of nominees.
In my opinion, both are effective ways and both are prone to just and fair judicial selection. Election seems a better form of selecting judges in a democracy because if the judges are chosen by people in power poistion then there is a possibility of system compromise and an unfair judicial system.