Revision: Judicial Accountability

Need for Judicial Accountability

• To Uphold Public Trust: Prioritising certain cases for hearing while delaying others erodes public trust. If the judiciary operates solely for rich and affluent classes, it may appear biassed and unfair to the underprivileged.
• Judicial Appointments: The collegium system, where judges appoint judges, raises concerns about transparency and potential biases.
• Conflict of Interest: The Chief Justice of India (CJI) deciding matters related to the master of the rolls while being a party to some cases raises questions about impartiality.
• Recent Allegations: Recent allegations of corruption against Justice Ramaswami and allegations of sexual harassment against Justice Ranjan Gogoi question the character of the judiciary. The judiciary’s restriction on outside bodies’ involvement in investigating corruption cases further complicates matters.
• Judicial Activism: Overreach in addressing citizen grievances has led to concerns about the judiciary encroaching on executive and legislative domains.
• Lack of Accountability: Without accountability, judicial independence may be misused for personal gain.

Steps Taken to Ensure Judicial Accountability

• Restatement of Values of Judicial Life: Adopted by the Supreme Court in 1997.
• Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct: Established in 2002.
• Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010: Established the National Judicial Oversight Committee.
• Live-Streaming of Court Proceedings: Approved by the Supreme Court.
• Draft Memorandum of Procedure, 2016: Includes “merit and integrity” as prime criteria for the appointment of judges.
• SC vs. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Case: Declared the CJI as a public authority under the RTI Act.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

Steps Required

• Media Scrutiny: The media should study and comment on judgments academically to ensure that judges are aware of public and scholarly oversight.
• Independent Judicial Lokpal: Establish an independent body for addressing complaints against judges.
• Comprehensive Code of Conduct: Develop a detailed code of conduct for judges.
• Two-Level Judicial Discipline Model:
  • First Level: Fine or suspension.
  • Second Level: Removal.
• Awareness of Diversity: Ensure that appointees are sensitive to and aware of the country’s diversity, making it a criterion in the appointment process.

DOWNLOAD PDF