While it is generally accepted that there are limitations to the concept of judicial immunity, such as willful breaches of the law or human rights violations, judicial immunity is an indispensable pillar of judicial independence. On the other hand, judges must be able to make their decisions without fear of being sued or prosecuted. This purports to rectify mistakes as much as possible. Under the rule of law, a fair system of appeals must be installed to ensure that judicial decisions can be challenged by anyone who might be negatively affected by them. While acting in a judicial function, a judge must enjoy a substantial level of protection from civil lawsuits or criminal proceedings in relation to the judge's work. While different legal systems may approach the concept of judicial immunity in slightly different ways, the underlying principles of this concept are the same. In recent years, however, judicial immunity has become an even more crucial, even existential, question for judges in many countries. Judicial immunity has always been a highly relevant issue for judges around the world. All opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the author as an external expert and do not necessarily reflect the official position of UNODC. Since 2018, he has been Vice President of the First Study Commission of the IAJ. International Association of Judges (IAJ). Roland Kempfle is a civil law judge at the Regional Court of Munich. Judicial Immunities Promote Fair and Impartial Judgments

Judicial decisions