Editing Judicial independence (section)

=== Australia ===
{{main|Judicial independence in Australia}}
There was a struggle to establish judicial independence in [[colonial Australia]],<ref name="Clark 2013">{{cite web |title=The struggle for judicial independence |last=Clark |first=D |url=http://www.law.mq.edu.au/public/download.jsp?id=131963 |access-date=2019-01-07 |archive-date=2016-03-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305145347/http://www.law.mq.edu.au/public/download.jsp?id=131963 |url-status=dead }} [2013] 12 Macquarie Law Journal 21.</ref> but by 1901 it was entrenched in the [[Australian constitution]], including the [[Separation of powers in Australia|separation of judicial power]] such that the [[High Court of Australia]] held in 2004 that all courts capable of exercising federal judicial power must be, and must appear to be, independent and impartial.<ref name="NAALAS 2004">{{cite AustLII|HCA|31|2004|litigants=North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley |parallelcite=(2004) 218 [[Commonwealth Law Reports|CLR]] 146}}. {{citation |url=http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2004/hca31-2004-06-17.pdf |title=Judgment summary |publisher=[[High Court of Australia|High Court]] |access-date=2019-01-07 |archive-date=2019-04-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190415105901/http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2004/hca31-2004-06-17.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Writing in 2007 [[Chief Justice of Australia]] [[Murray Gleeson]] stated that Australians largely took judicial independence for granted and the details were not matters of wide interest.<ref name="Gleeson 2007">{{cite web |last1=Gleeson |first1=M |title=Public Confidence in the Courts |url=http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/speeches/former-justices/gleesoncj/cj_9feb07.pdf |website=High Court |access-date=13 November 2018 |date=9 February 2007 |archive-date=28 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190728072707/http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/speeches/former-justices/gleesoncj/cj_9feb07.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> No federal judge and only one supreme court judge has been [[List of Australian judges whose security of tenure was challenged|removed for misconduct]] since 1901.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Kirby |first1=M |title=Discipline of judicial officers in Australia |url=http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/speeches/former-justices/kirbyj/kirbyj_judicialgroup.htm |website=High Court |access-date=7 January 2019 |date=February 2001 |archive-date=19 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190119211532/http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/speeches/former-justices/kirbyj/kirbyj_judicialgroup.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> Immunity from suit for judicial acts, security of tenure, and fixed remuneration are all established parts of judicial independence in Australia. The appointment of judges remains exclusively at the discretion of the executive which gives rise to concerns expressed that judicial appointments are political and made for political gain.<ref name="Opeskin 1990">{{cite book |last1=Blackshield |first1=A |editor1=Opeskin, B |editor2=Wheeler, F |name-list-style=amp |title=The Australian Federal Judicial System |date=1990 |pages=427–8 |chapter=The Appointment and Removal of Federal Judges}}</ref> Issues continue to arise in relation to dealing with [[judicial misconduct]] not warranting removal and incapacity of judges. In 2013 [[Chief Justice of NSW]] [[Tom Bathurst]] identified the way in which judicial and court performance was measured as one of the most substantial risks to the separation of powers in Australia.<ref name="Bathurst (2013)">{{cite web |last=Bathurst |first=T F |author-link1=Tom Bathurst |title=Separation of Powers: Reality or Desirable Fiction? |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/NSWJSchol/2013/39.pdf |access-date=2019-01-07 |archive-date=2017-05-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170516135756/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/NSWJSchol/2013/39.pdf |url-status=live }} [2013] New South Wales Judicial Scholarship 39.</ref>