Editorial 2 : Well Judged
Context: Supreme Court’s decision to make judges’ assets public.
Introduction: The Supreme Court (SC) unanimously resolved to publicly disclose judges’ assets in a full court meeting on April 1. The decision prioritizes transparency and openness and comes amid allegations of financial misconduct against sitting judges.
Historical Context
- 1997 Code of Ethics
- The SC first resolved to publicly disclose judges’ assets through the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life.
- Objective: To uphold ethical standards and public trust in the judiciary.
- 2009 Delhi High Court Ruling
- Delhi HC upheld disclosure of judges’ assets under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
- Key Argument: Judges must adhere to the standards they enforce.
- 2015 NJAC Judgement: The Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) but acknowledged the need for judicial accountability mechanisms.
Current Challenges in Judicial Accountability
- Recent Controversies
- Justice Yashwant Varma (Delhi HC): Allegations of unaccounted cash found at his official residence.
- Justice Shekhar Yadav (Allahabad HC): Accusations of partisan bias and prejudice.
- Institutional Limitations
- Impeachment Process: Constitutionally mandated but requires political consensus, making it impractical.
- In-House Inquiries: Sole discretion of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), whose tenure is increasingly short.
- Informal Solutions like transfers or withdrawal of judicial work are criticized as inadequate and non-transparent.
Way Forward
- Need for Framework
- Internal Mechanisms: Accountability must originate within the judiciary to preserve independence.
- Public Trust: Asset declaration is a step forward, but broader reforms are needed.
- Recommendations
- Formalize in-house inquiry processes to ensure impartiality.
- Develop transparent criteria for judicial transfers and appointments.
- Strengthen ethical guidelines and enforce compliance.
Conclusion: While the Supreme Court’s move to disclose assets is commendable, sustained efforts are required to institutionalize accountability without compromising judicial autonomy. The judiciary’s credibility hinges on balancing transparency with independence.