Back to Publication

General / Thematic: The Individual Judge

From Individual Judge to Judicial Bureaucracy: The Emergence of Judicial Councils and the Changing Nature of Judicial Accountability in Court Administration


Tin Bunjevac

Over the last 20 years, courts in Australia and many developed countries have experienced an exponential increase in the number and complexity of cases coming before them, which was also accompanied by increasing public expectations regarding the cost, timeliness, quality and accessibility of justice.[1] Judges have found themselves under increasing pressure from politicians, prosecutors, lawyers, the media and other stakeholders to share the burden of cost-cutting in the public sector and deliver more justice in less time and for less money.[2]

Please access a pdf of the full article using the link to the left.

(2017) 40(2) UNSWLJ 806:

  1. See generally Stephen Parker, Courts and the Public (Australian Institute of Judicial Administration, 1998); Marco Fabri, Philip M Langbroek and Hplqne Pauliat (eds), The Administration of Justice in Europe: Towards the Development of Quality Standards (Research Institute on Judicial Systems, National Research Council, 2003); Tania Sourdin, ‘The Timeliness Project: Background Report’ (Report, Australian Centre for Justice Innovation, 2013); Tin Bunjevac, ‘Court Governance in Context: Beyond Independence’ (2011) 4(1) International Journal for Court Administration 35.
  2. Marco Fabri and Philip M Langbroek, ‘Developing a Public Administration Perspective on Judicial Systems in Europe’ in Marco Fabri and Philip M Langbroek (eds), The Challenge of Change for Judicial Systems: Developing a Public Administration Perspective (IOS Press, 2000) 1.