Parliamentary Accountability of the Judiciary as Challenge of Judicial Independence

In recent years, the necessity of the accountability of public institutions has become a key issue under the influence of New Public Management (NPM). The basic principle is that being responsible and possessing power makes the person accountable. Accordingly, the judiciary, as well as other public institutions, must be held accountable for its performance at various levels, in particular, the procedures, decision-making process and implementation of decisions. However, accountability in the judicial system has always been faced many opposite views to guarantee judicial independence and other considerations such as sensitivity and specific function of the judiciary. In this paper, with emphasizing the necessity of creating a balance between the two competing values, namely 'independence' and 'accountability', the available capacities of the Iranian legal system are examined specifically regarding the accountability of the judiciary to the legislature and its members. The research method is descriptive-analytical and by utilizing library resources, this article while explaining why the judiciary is accountable to parliament, attempts to analyze and critique opposite views in this regard. The results of this study show that although the accountability of the judiciary has some differences and limitations compared to other institutions, undoubtedly judicial independence never means impunity or exemption from accountability. The examination of the available capacities in the constitution, including the right of parliament members to express comment and investigate, as well as the mechanism for dealing with complaints and reports submitted to the commission of the ninety principle, illustrates the fact that can be achieved to a degree of accountability of the judiciary to the parliament -especially with regard to judicial processes- while guarantee and respecting the judicial independence.