IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who's to Judge? Understanding Issues of Auditor Independence Versus Judicial Independence


  • Kleinman Gary

    (Montclair State University, New Jersey)

  • Anandarajan Asokan

    (New Jersey Institute of Technology)

  • Palmon Dan

    (Rutgers Business School, New Jersey)


We explore differences in the roles of auditors and judges in the United States, emphasizing the issue of independence for each group. We examine factors that influence the independence of US judges and auditors. We use examples to highlight the potential impact of various factors on each profession and explore how they are affected by differences in the nature of their responsibilities. Based on these examples, we find generalized lessons that are applicable to each profession and explore further questions that should be asked. While much research has been done on factors that could potentially influence auditor independence, no research to date has examined lessons that auditors can learn from the judicial profession with respect to independence in the United States setting, and vice versa. This paper is a contemplation of the different threats that exist to independence and the difficulty in achieving it in two differently structured fields where its attainment was important for achieving societal ends associated with the professional roles. We hope through this discussion and presentation to broaden the perspective of both professions (judges, auditors) by furthering their understanding of the independence dilemmas facing occupants of the other’s role.

Suggested Citation

  • Kleinman Gary & Anandarajan Asokan & Palmon Dan, 2012. "Who's to Judge? Understanding Issues of Auditor Independence Versus Judicial Independence," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:aelcon:v:2:y:2012:i:1:n:4

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Download restriction for institutions: For access to full text, subscription to the journal is required. Individual readers who register with De Gruyter Online get free access.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:aelcon:v:2:y:2012:i:1:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.