Hearings by Impartial and Independent Tribunals
- The tribunal was protected from political influence
- Citizens were granted a fair and public hearing by a competent, impartial, and independent tribunal in the determination of their rights
- The proceedings of any complaints were transparent, and all parties to the complaint were given an equal opportunity to present evidence
- Forum shopping was discouraged
- A fair trial is expeditious.
- A violation of the right to a fair and public hearing requires an effective remedy.
- Any body that meets the criteria of impartiality and independence can be considered a tribunal.
- A fair trial entails the absence of influence.
- A situation in which the executive and the judiciary are not clearly distinguishable is incompatible with the notion of an independent and impartial tribunal.
- Independence of the judiciary requires proper procedures detailing appointment, term limits, security, and remuneration.
- In the determination of suits at law the independence and impartiality of tribunals is an absolute right.
- Proceedings on complaints and appeals must be transparent.
- The opportunity should exist to present evidence in support of a complaint.
- The right to a public hearing must be protected except for specific and objective reasons as determined by law.
- Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, impartial, and independent tribunal in determination of his/her rights.
- Appeal channels, when available, should be narrowly constructed to avoid "forum shopping."
- The notion of fair trial includes the guarantee of a fair and public hearing.
- Impartiality requires that judges act without bias, and that the tribunal appears unbiased to the reasonable observer.