Judiciary must cure itself

How to get justice for common man when delay has resulted in piling of cases leading to situation that it will take 300years to clear the back log in present pace .The judges must be accountable for their performance and have exemplary conduct. Recently a former Chief justice of High court and judge of Supreme Court Markande  Katju has openly mentioned that Chief justices are reluctant to expose corruption in judiciary and cited  cases of judges who were corrupt but were still favored with appointment by the Supreme court despite adverse reports. Same court told Genral V.K.Singh to be honorable and ‘blow with the wind’. Was that function of highest court to do this? The case of High court judge Dinakaran is well known as he was accused of disproportionate wealth and other charges but was finally let off as he resigned although a committee was set up that had evidence of his being guilty. Two other judges faced impeachment but could resign and get out. The resignation should not have been accepted and in one case the impeachment failed as Congress member abstained from Parliament .We have generally reposed faith in higher judiciary but some notable cases have cast doubts about the equity and justice meted out by superior courts and that has led to the question of how judiciary functions and is views itself. The result is a compromise formula of Judicial Accountability Commission.

The present system is collegiums that consist of five judges including Chief Justice responsible for appointments of judges is virtually a club. In other words the judges appoint judges and there is a club of five whereas the system followed by them and norms are secret and not known to other judges also. This appears a very clandestine functioning in a democracy. Recently the court also turned down an RTI plea asking judges to reveal their own assets. What is so holy about the judges that an honorable citizen of the country cannot have information about their assets and working? No where in the world this system prevails and there is no provision in the Indian constitution providing what the court itself has evolved and is following. In UK Queen appoints judges after proposal of the Prime Minister and in US too it is the President who appoints the judges and finally it is ratified by the senate. US has gone through this phase when President Jafferson had to get rid of some of them but now the system is so clean that evaluation of their performance is regularly done. It is exemplary case of checks and blances in the Constitution. US constitution  has enabled it to keep the institutions of judiciary, executive and legislature in fine balance and ensuring no one transgresses its limits. Unfortunately Indian Constitution that needs extensive revision in view of past experience does not provide any system. President was supposed to appointment judges on advice of the cabinet and before 1993 executive appointed judges. Even then there were fine judges with few exceptions and it met with problems when it was distorted in emergency. Consequently a change was done. Due to question raised in typical cases it is again being reviewed and the commission is the outcome of deliberation that has led to parliament enacting the present law.

Instead of in- breeding of judges without accountability the present system the commission will consist of CJI and two senior most judges, the law minister and leader of opposition in addition two eminent persons nominated by the Prime Minister in consultation with CJ and opposition. There is predominance of judges in this system also but not unquestioned inbreeding as there are other equally eminent and responsible representatives of government and opposition on the board.It certainly takes away the monopolistic hold of Supreme court but is it not democracy where we function with participation of different institutions? The court might still try to annul it but fair system as it is needs to be tried and tested.

The highest court must set also norms for trial courts as cases dragging on for years and in some cases people die but cases are not decided. It is a shame for Indian democracy that there are more under trials in the jails than convicts. The judiciary need to be free but also accountable for their performance and conduct to the nation through the representatives of people and this is precisely the purpose of setting up the commission which has been unanimously voted by Parliament of India. People must have faith that if they go to court they will get justice and protection without delay. This is minimum expected from egalitarian regime.

Bus Stop

First Psssenger-Has Modi’s speech about cleanliness made any impact in Himachal?

Second Passenger: Yes now on special occasions people have started giving garbage baskets as gifts.

Prof N.K.Singh former chairman International Airports Authorty of India