> If judges make decisions which don't represent the mandate of their constituents, they can/should be removed.
This collapses separation of powers, is against the idea that "law" and "politics" are separate things, and paves the way for removing judges who don't support the views of the Party.
But i do believe that judges should be appointed by a panel of existing judges, and once appointed, can only be removed by said panel (and not the gov't).
This collapses separation of powers, is against the idea that "law" and "politics" are separate things, and paves the way for removing judges who don't support the views of the Party.