Globally, countries are faced with a complex act of statecraft: how to design and defensible complaints and discipline regime. In this collection, contributors provide critical analyses of judicial complaints and discipline systems in thirteen diverse jurisdictions, revealing that an effective and legitimate regime requires the nuanced calibration of numerous public values including independence, accountability, impartiality, fairness, reasoned justification, transparency, representation, and efficiency. The jurisdictions examined are Australia, Canada, China, Croatia, England and Wales, India, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Poland, South Africa, and the United States. The core findings are four-fold. First, the norms and practices of each discipline regime differ in ways that reflect distinct social, political, and cultural contexts. Second, some jurisdictions are doing better than others in responding to challenges of designing a nuanced and normatively defensible regime. Third, no jurisdiction has yet managed to construct a regime that can be said to adequately promote public confidence. Finally, important lessons can be learned through analysis of, and critically constructive engagement with, other jurisdictions. The first comprehensive comparative collection on judicial discipline systems, Disciplining Judges, will inspire new conversations among academics, students, judges, governmental officials and political scientists.

Regulating Judges presents a novel approach to judicial studies. It goes beyond the traditional clash of judicial independence versus judicial accountability. Drawing on regulatory theory, Devlin and Dodek argue that judicial regulation is multi-faceted and requires us to consider the complex interplay of values, institutional norms, procedures, resources and outcomes. Inspired by this conceptual framework, the book invites scholars from 19 jurisdictions to describe and critique the regulatory regimes for a variety of countries from around the world. This innovative and provocative analysis of the many different ways that judiciaries around the world are regulated covers common law, civil law and other legal systems, and the developed and developing world. Contributors include a diverse talent pool of established scholars and new voices for a globally inclusive comparative examination of judiciaries in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Americas and Australia. The overall conclusion is that the regulation of judges is very much a work in progress, and that a variety of actors bear responsibility for moving the project forward. Scholars in the fields of law, social sciences, regulation theory, and public administration will find Regulating Judges an impactful read, as will regulators, public policy makers and analysts, and judges themselves. Contributors include: D. Aksamovic, G. Appleby, R.W. Campbell, K.-W. Chan, H. Corder, S.M.R. Cravens, T. Dare, R. Devlin, F. Dias Simoes, A. Dodek, M. Fabri, D. Fennelly, G. Gee, R. Goldstone , M.A. Jardim de Santa Cruz Oliveira, F. Klass, S. Le Mire, J.L. Neo, T.G. Puthucherril, A. Trochev, H. Whalen-Bridge, C. Wolf, F. Yulin, L. Zer-Gutman

Despite the widespread belief that Canada is a country of liberty, equality, and inclusiveness, many persons with disabilities experience social exclusion and marginalization. In this book, twenty-four scholars from a variety of disciplines contend that achieving equality for the disabled is not fundamentally a question of medicine or health, nor is it an issue of sensitivity or compassion. Rather, it is a question of politics, and of power and powerlessness. This book argues that we need a new understanding of participatory citizenship that encompasses the disabled, new policies to respond to their needs, and a new vision of their entitlements.