Which arrangement best protects judges from executive pressure?

Correct answer: Making appointment and removal processes difficult

Correct answer: A — making appointment and removal processes difficult, especially removal without a proper constitutional process. Judges need security of tenure so that they do not fear losing office merely because a government dislikes a judgment. This protection supports impartial decisions, although it does not place judges above the Constitution or accountability. A therefore best protects independence. B is wrong because requiring ministerial permission for every judgment would directly destroy judicial independence. C is wrong because judges must remain neutral and should not act as campaigners for political parties. D is wrong because placing courts under ministries would allow the executive to control their administration and decisions. The phrase security of tenure is a useful memory cue: a judge should be removable only through the prescribed, difficult legal process, not through ordinary political displeasure.