Supreme Court Of India: Judiciary Should Initiate Efforts To Reform Itself To Retain Its Integrity 

0
Supreme Court Of India: Judiciary Should Initiate Efforts To Reform Itself To Retain Its Integrity 
Supreme Court Of India: Judiciary Should Initiate Efforts To Reform Itself To Retain Its Integrity 

The four senior most judges of the Supreme Court recently rebelled against the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and brought the goings on in the closed corridors of the Supreme Court into the “court of public opinion”.

For many close to the issue, the move did not come as a surprise, but for some it has seemed like a conspiracy.

A general refrain in fact was that it was brewing for some time. Reportedly letters were being secretly circulated with plenty of insinuation and innuendos regarding the formation of benches on some critical economic and political issues importance.

All these came out in the open with the four judges publicly pointing to CJI’s alleged indiscretion in the allocation of cases to benches and his other administrative decisions.

It is highly likely that the effort will be to bury the issue and continue business as usual when the court resumes functioning , but this would inflict damage on the judicial system. The matter must be examined fully instead.

Issues Raised Don’t Affect Public Welfare

A first step is to review the issues raised by four senior most judges to see if they concern people’s welfare at large. Prima facie, all the concerns raised relate to work-allocation within the court.

The judges have objected that the critical issues that grab attention are being sent to benches comprising junior judges , passing up senior judges.

With this assertion, the judges are implying their juniors are not as qualified to deal with such critical cases. But in the same breath, they have applied the logic that the Chief Justice of India is only the “first among equals” in order to establish that he is not above the rest of the bench.

Additionally, the judges’ referring to the case related to the death of Justice Loya just to “settle scores” regarding case allotment suggests a politicising of the matter.

It cannot be coincidence that senior advocate Dushyant Dave penned a opinion piece in The Indian Express accusing the CJI of administrative overreach on the same day that the four senior judges decided to go public.

Questions Surrounding The Move

The circumstances of the judges’ decision raise several questions:

  • Was their decision to go public impulsive or premeditated?
  • Is “public opinion” being used as a façade by a clique of activist-lawyers who are well known for bullying non-conformist judges to focus on political agenda under the garb of judicial activism?
  • Is this judicial activism for the public good?

Critical Issues Afflicting Judiciary Ignored

As can be seen, none of the issues so far raised by such activist-lawyers tackle issues for improving the access of the country’s highest court to common people.

For example, the issue of exorbitant fees being charged by lawyers. Or another issue not addressed is that the judiciary has kept itself out of the purview of the Right To Information Act. Judges are also not required to declare their assets like other public servants.

The selection of judges to higher judiciary is not only opaque but also highly clannish. The Supreme Court striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) passed unanimously by Parliament is a case in point to highlight the higher judiciary’s aversion to reform. Justice J Chelameswar, who led the recent revolt, was ironically a major dissenter to the NJAC judgment.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here