Joseph says independence of judiciary needs to be protected like the ‘chastity of a virgin’. Minister Jaitley says judges are being bullied via social media.
From holding the press conference to ‘judges bribery’ case, Justice Chelameswar, who retires today, has been the flag-bearer of dissent in the higher judiciary.
Justice Chelameswar’s stepping out as a leader of the collegium is important, but as a judge in NJAC case, he privileged the executive as central to individual liberty and the structure of constitutional institutions.
As Narendra Modi becomes India’s second-longest consecutively serving Prime Minister, we look at how he compares with Indira Gandhi across four key dimensions.
All courts / judicial institutions should have e-mail IDs. Why should all courts not provide e-mail IDs, when even school kids have e-mail IDs? Digital communications are tamper-proof and deniability is non-existent. Litigants can make submissions to these IDs.
As a matter of fact, courts are using WhattsApp to serve notices / issue summons. Digital communications are not only ethics compliant, they are also environmentally friendly. It will bring around a degree of transparency.
To regret is one thing, but to truly come out clean is another. Justice Kurien may probably be an exception but it is common knowledge in public space how some judges who had humble beginnings had become judges in the first place because of their political leanings or soft corners, and how some judges have amassed wealth beyond their known and manageable sources of income in Office. The case in point is the vagueness that still stands on the charges of amassing wealth against Chief Justice Balakrishnan, etc.
One way to handle this could be – the Judge should, like Executive, declare his and family income and assets the day he is appointed to any court – be it at the lowest Sessions Court level or to a High Court or to Supreme Court. That, to me, is the starting point.
On a more serious note, let us join a few dots. 2. The NJAC Bill was passed early in the government’s tenure, with the political class showing rare unanimity, which was elusive on other important issues like Land Acquisition. 2. The impeachment motion against CJI Dipak Misra was rejected by the Vice President. 3. The complaint of the lady employee and issues pertaining to her family members have been swirling around with the authorities for several months before they entered the public domain. Observe how they have been dealt with. Or even how protests in the last few days, some as far afield as Bangalore, are being contained. 4. For the executive to covet the power to appoint judges or have some role in disciplinary proceedings is not an act of altruism. The higher judiciary, especially the apex court, is the only meaningful source of countervailing power in the system. Not just ordinary citizens but even other institutions who find their autonomy being undermined have no other means of redress. Hence Mrs Gandhi’s desire for a “ committed judiciary “. I blindly supported the NJAC judgment without reading a word of it. It was physics, not law. 5. When so much power resides in the higher judiciary, it has to raise the bar very high for itself. If it falters, the almost uncritical faith ordinary citizens place in it will start melting. At the appropriate time, the executive will reclaim paramountcy. One sees in Justice Dr Dhananjay Chandrachud a fine appreciation of what is at stake in this matter. It goes beyond one individual. If not handled with fairness, majesty will begin to leach out of the institution.
A small suggestion.
All courts / judicial institutions should have e-mail IDs. Why should all courts not provide e-mail IDs, when even school kids have e-mail IDs? Digital communications are tamper-proof and deniability is non-existent. Litigants can make submissions to these IDs.
As a matter of fact, courts are using WhattsApp to serve notices / issue summons. Digital communications are not only ethics compliant, they are also environmentally friendly. It will bring around a degree of transparency.
To regret is one thing, but to truly come out clean is another. Justice Kurien may probably be an exception but it is common knowledge in public space how some judges who had humble beginnings had become judges in the first place because of their political leanings or soft corners, and how some judges have amassed wealth beyond their known and manageable sources of income in Office. The case in point is the vagueness that still stands on the charges of amassing wealth against Chief Justice Balakrishnan, etc.
One way to handle this could be – the Judge should, like Executive, declare his and family income and assets the day he is appointed to any court – be it at the lowest Sessions Court level or to a High Court or to Supreme Court. That, to me, is the starting point.
On a more serious note, let us join a few dots. 2. The NJAC Bill was passed early in the government’s tenure, with the political class showing rare unanimity, which was elusive on other important issues like Land Acquisition. 2. The impeachment motion against CJI Dipak Misra was rejected by the Vice President. 3. The complaint of the lady employee and issues pertaining to her family members have been swirling around with the authorities for several months before they entered the public domain. Observe how they have been dealt with. Or even how protests in the last few days, some as far afield as Bangalore, are being contained. 4. For the executive to covet the power to appoint judges or have some role in disciplinary proceedings is not an act of altruism. The higher judiciary, especially the apex court, is the only meaningful source of countervailing power in the system. Not just ordinary citizens but even other institutions who find their autonomy being undermined have no other means of redress. Hence Mrs Gandhi’s desire for a “ committed judiciary “. I blindly supported the NJAC judgment without reading a word of it. It was physics, not law. 5. When so much power resides in the higher judiciary, it has to raise the bar very high for itself. If it falters, the almost uncritical faith ordinary citizens place in it will start melting. At the appropriate time, the executive will reclaim paramountcy. One sees in Justice Dr Dhananjay Chandrachud a fine appreciation of what is at stake in this matter. It goes beyond one individual. If not handled with fairness, majesty will begin to leach out of the institution.
On a lighter note, all women should be chaste, not just the virgins.