ESG And Judicial Independence: Building Accountability, Transparency And Fairness In The Legal System

Download

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria have emerged as essential metrics to assess the ethical impact of businesses and organisations on society. ESG factors are no longer solely the realm of corporate responsibility but have expanded to influence numerous sectors, including the legal system. The increasing importance of ESG in business practices has direct implications for the judicial system, particularly regarding judicial independence — the principle that judges should be free from external influence and able to make impartial decisions based on law and facts.

While ESG principles have primarily been discussed in the context of business operations, they also have significant implications for the legal system. The judiciary plays a critical role in interpreting and enforcing laws related to ESG issues such as environmental protection, human rights and corporate governance. In this context, judicial independence becomes crucial in ensuring the fair and impartial application of these laws.

Judicial Independence: The Cornerstone Of Justice

Judicial independence is the principle that judges must be free from external influences, such as political, social, or economic pressures, that could affect their decisions. It guarantees that the judiciary can perform its function of interpreting and applying the law without fear of retaliation, coercion, or undue influence from other branches of government, powerful interest groups, or public opinion.

Speaking at the recent 24th Commonwealth Law Association Conference in Malta, the Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, repeated her call to reinforce impartiality in relation to the appointment of judges. The Chief Justice made reference to the proposals to amend the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 and the Federal Constitution to remove the role of the prime minister in the appointment of judges. According to the Chief Justice, such an amendment would ensure that judicial appointments remain free from any perception of political influence.

An independent judiciary ensures that laws are applied equally and fairly, without bias, and that individuals can access justice irrespective of their social status, political connections, or financial resources. Judicial independence is essential for the protection of fundamental rights, the prevention of abuses of power, and the maintenance of the rule of law.

In the context of ESG, judicial independence is critical for ensuring that decisions regarding environmental regulations, human rights protections, and corporate governance are made based on the law, not political pressures or corporate interests. Without judicial independence, the legal system risks becoming an instrument of political control or corporate influence, undermining the very principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability that ESG seeks to promote.

The Role Of Judicial Independence in ESG cases

Judicial independence plays a pivotal role in the adjudication of ESG-related disputes. These disputes often involve complex issues with wide-ranging social, environmental, and economic implications. Whether it is a case involving environmental degradation caused by a corporation, a human rights violation by a multinational company, or corporate governance failures that harm shareholders or stakeholders, the impartiality of the judiciary is essential to ensure that justice is served.

1. Impartial adjudication

Judicial independence ensures that judges can adjudicate ESG cases without fear of external pressure from political entities, corporations, or powerful interest groups. In cases involving environmental protection or corporate accountability, for example, judges must be able to rule without fear of retaliation from government officials or business leaders who may have an interest in the outcome. When judges are free to apply the law impartially, they can ensure that justice is not swayed by the financial or political power of any party involved.

2. Upholding human rights

Judicial independence is particularly vital in cases that involve human rights, which are central to the social component of ESG. In many cases, governments or corporations may attempt to suppress or violate human rights in the pursuit of economic or political power. An independent judiciary is able to hold governments, businesses, and other actors accountable for such violations, ensuring that the rights of individuals are protected regardless of political pressure or corporate influence.

3. Environmental accountability

Environmental cases, such as those involving pollution or deforestation, often require judicial decisions that may conflict with the interests of powerful corporate stakeholders. Judges must be free from pressure to rule in favour of corporations that seek to avoid regulatory compliance or minimise environmental impact assessments. Judicial independence guarantees that courts can enforce environmental laws, even when doing so may have negative consequences for business interests.

4. Corporate governance

The governance aspect of ESG focuses on corporate behaviour and transparency. Courts often play a central role in holding companies accountable for unethical or illegal governance practices, such as corruption, fraud, or mismanagement. Judicial independence is crucial for ensuring that decisions regarding corporate governance are based on the law and facts, not influenced by corporate lobbying or political pressure.

Challenges To Judicial Independence In The Context of ESG

Despite the importance of judicial independence in ensuring the fair adjudication of ESG cases, several challenges undermine its effectiveness. These challenges include political interference, corporate influence, underfunding of the judiciary, and public pressure.

1. Political interference

In many countries, the appointment and removal of judges are controlled by the executive or legislative branches of government. When political leaders have the power to appoint judges based on their political views or preferences, the judiciary may lack the independence necessary to make impartial decisions. Political interference is particularly problematic in cases involving ESG, as powerful politicians may seek to influence decisions that affect corporate interests, environmental policies, or human rights protections.

2. Corporate influence

Large corporations often have significant resources and political influence, which they can use to sway judicial decisions. In cases involving environmental protection, labour rights, or corporate governance, businesses may attempt to exert pressure on the judiciary through lobbying, financial contributions, or personal connections. This can result in biased rulings that favour corporate interests at the expense of environmental sustainability, worker protections, or human rights.

3. Underfunding of the judiciary

An independent judiciary requires sufficient resources to operate effectively. In many countries, judicial systems are underfunded, which can lead to delays, inefficiencies, and a lack of capacity to handle complex ESG cases. Without adequate financial support, judges may struggle to access the necessary information, technology, and training to make informed decisions on ESG matters.

4. Public pressure

In high-profile ESG cases, judges may face public pressure to rule in a certain way. This can occur in cases involving environmental disasters, human rights violations, or corporate scandals that attract widespread attention. While public opinion should not influence judicial decisions, judges may feel compelled to consider the social and political implications of their rulings, particularly when there is significant media scrutiny.

Strengthening Judicial Independence To Uphold ESG Principles

To address these challenges and ensure that the judiciary can effectively uphold ESG principles, several reforms are necessary:

1. Merit-based judicial appointments

To reduce political interference in judicial decision-making, judicial appointments should be based on merit, qualifications, and experience rather than political considerations. Transparent, independent judicial selection processes can help ensure that judges are chosen for their legal expertise and commitment to upholding the rule of law, rather than their political affiliations.

2. Financial support for the judiciary

Governments must allocate sufficient resources to the judiciary to ensure its independence and effectiveness. This includes funding for training, technology, court infrastructure, and competitive salaries for judges. Adequate funding allows the judiciary to handle complex ESG cases, ensure timely decisions, and maintain impartiality in the face of external pressures.

3. Public awareness and education

Public education campaigns can help raise awareness of the importance of judicial independence and the role of the judiciary in enforcing ESG-related laws. When citizens understand the value of an independent judiciary, they are more likely to support efforts to strengthen judicial independence and demand fair, transparent legal processes.

Reforms To Judicial Appointment System Needed

ESG principles are reshaping how businesses and governments operate, with profound implications for the legal system. Judicial independence plays a critical role in ensuring that ESG-related laws are applied fairly and impartially, protecting the environment, human rights, and good governance practices. However, challenges such as political interference, corporate influence, and underfunding pose significant threats to judicial independence, particularly in high-stakes ESG cases.

To address these challenges, reforms that promote merit-based judicial appointments, adequate funding for the judiciary and public education are essential. By strengthening judicial independence, societies can ensure that the rule of law is maintained and that ESG principles are upheld in the pursuit of sustainable and just governance. An independent judiciary is not only vital for ensuring fairness and accountability in ESG-related cases but also for safeguarding democracy, human rights and the integrity of the legal system as a whole.

* This article was authored by RDS Partner, S. Saravana Kumar and was recently published by Edge Malaysia on 9.4.2025

25 April 2025