The Hindu Business Line : Judicial credibility

Old timers would have squirmed with unease on reading the news that on June 12, the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, Mr A. K. Ganguly, was present at a function organised by the Government of Tamil Nadu at which the Chief Minister, Mr M. Karunanidhi, laid the foundation stone for the new Legislative Assembly complex and Secretariat.

Justice Ganguly himself was apparently conscious that he had thereby broken with tradition and custom, for he felt it necessary to offer an explanation. According to The Hindu of June 14, he said the normal practice was for judiciary and its members to stay away from the executive and legislature which were the other arms of the State. “That is the conventional view”, he went on, “I think the judiciary is part of the State. That is also the Constitutional dispensation. Being part of the State, Judges and judiciary are not out of place in this evening’s function”.

This column respectfully differs from this view. Judiciary is certainly one among the three branches of governance envisaged by the Constitution, but this should not be construed as conferring the freedom to intermingle at one’s discretion. The effectiveness of each of the branches lies in its preserving its own distinctive identity. Of the three, a vastly greater responsibility lies on the judiciary not only to be independent and above the fray, but to seem to be so. Therefore, it is imperative for the judiciary not to seem like getting or being too close to the other two branches.

In a memorable lecture on ‘The Culture of a Judge’, the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Mr R. C. Lahoti, addressing fellow judges in the National Judicial Academy had this to say on the role that a judge should live up to: “He cannot be permitted to say… that from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. he is a Judge and from 5 p.m. to 10 a.m. he is a master of his own. A Judge, whether in his seat or on his own, whether moving around in the city or travelling across the country, is known and seen by people as a Judge. The holder of a judicial office is not permitted to deviate from virtue even in his dreams.

“So remember, if you are a Judge you are bound by the moral code of a Judge for 24 hours of the day. Your every action must be transparent. You are watched by society. Your personal actions, your family life and your behaviour with every living creature with whom you deal must all be judicious, upright, above board and an example to the society”.

Practising aloofness

Keeping these time-honoured tenets in mind, the Restatement of the Values of Judicial Life adopted for the judiciary in India on the initiative of the Supreme Court has unambiguously laid down the following, among other, values for strict observance: “The behaviour and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must reaffirm the people’s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary. Accordingly, any act of a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court, whether in official or personal capacity, which erodes the credibility of the perception has to be avoided. A Judge should practise a degree of aloofness consistent with the dignity of his office.”

It may well be that a Judge of the High Court or Supreme Court has the good sense not to let his proximity to the executive affect his independence and impartiality, but there is very much the danger of his example being carried to indiscriminate extremes by the subordinate judiciary, especially in situations where holders of judicial office are viewed as favourites or erstwhile members of particular political parties.

B. S. RAGHAVAN

New Assembly complex by 2010
New Assembly complex to have elements of Valluvar Kottam

More Stories on : Courts/Legal Issues | Politics | Tamil Nadu | Offhand

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
EU: Pains of growing up

Farm loan waiver: An ill-conceived package

Rice soup

Judicial credibility

Petroleum product prices — Getting the real message

Progressive corporate

Procurement levels