Establishing Judicial Security: An Examination of Challenges and Strategies

“Judicial security,” a relatively recent concept in security studies, remains a subject of ongoing debate with no universally accepted definition. Despite the varied interpretations, a recurring theme in prior research is the notion of “ensuring citizens’ access to justice through legal proceedings.”Securing judicial integrity is crucial in building citizens’ confidence in the judiciary. If people perceive justice as elusive or feel the judiciary may fail to deliver it, they might opt for independent conflict resolution. Consequently, judicial security plays a pivotal role in bolstering national security, underscoring its importance in preserving national stability.Acknowledging the significance of judicial security, this paper seeks to explore the query: How can we ensure judicial security? To address this, we first need to pinpoint the precise definition of ‘judicial security’ by reviewing existing research. The paper subsequently presents methods for preserving judicial security and concludes by highlighting potential risks that could undermine it.

The research approach is qualitative and thus has benefited from qualitative research tools. Also, for exploring the concept of judicial security and presenting strategies, it is analytical-prescriptive and is applied in terms of purpose; because it has provided a solution for solving the problem of how to ensure judicial security.  The data was collected and analyzed through library research.

Ensuring judicial security is a crucial step towards fostering societal peace and psychological safety. The term ‘judicial security’ is interpreted in various ways by experts. For a more nuanced understanding, it’s beneficial to separately explore the concepts of “security” and “justice.” Security refers to the state of being free from threats and preserving stability, while justice pertains to the resolution of legal conflicts in accordance with the law and through due legal processes. When these two notions are merged, judicial security can be encapsulated as the assurance citizens have in the judicial authorities’ ability to uphold threatened rights or reinstate violated ones.In this interpretation, judicial authorities form the foundation for the establishment of judicial security. The objective of judicial security is twofold: to safeguard rights that are under threat and to reinstate rights that have been violated. The government, in its broadest context, holds the primary responsibility for the creation of judicial security. Achieving judicial security necessitates the formulation of strategies that can instill a sense of security within the structure of judicial institutions, both objectively and subjectively. These strategies are designed to enhance predictability, ensure the realization of justice, and furnish mechanisms for dispute resolution within judicial institutions.To improve judicial security, five key strategies are proposed: 1. The establishment of a judicial order; 2. The creation of relative stability in laws; 3. The utilization of expert legal counsel; 4. The implementation of effective media management; 5. The assurance of client satisfaction. Additionally, maintaining judicial security necessitates the mitigation of threats in this domain. These threats encompass fraudulent documentation, the inability to substantiate rights, collusion with judicial authorities, and the lack of access to the litigant.Moreover, judicial security is endangered by three issues in the citizen-government relationship: 1) the inability to initiate a lawsuit; 2) the preference for informal ways over litigation; and 3) judicial corruption. Judicial security is also compromised in the relationship between the government agent and the government itself, with the most significant factor being the impact of political slogans, such as anti-corruption campaigns, on the judicial process. It’s important to note that ensuring judicial security is a long-term endeavor that necessitates multi-year and ongoing planning. Furthermore, the perception of judicial security among the clients of judicial institutions is contingent upon its sustainability.