The press conference by four senior-most Judges of the Supreme Court (SC) on January 12 – an unprecedented event in the annals of the Indian judiciary – expressing concerns about the manner in which the Chief Justice of India (CJI) was administering the Court, and releasing a letter that they had written to him reflects a glaring crisis in the country’s justice system that affects us all. Unsurprisingly, this event, which will remain etched in the annals of the Court’s history, has generated fierce debate.
The issue is four judges questioning not just the integrity of the CJI but also by implication of their colleagues. We are disposed to believe the truth of the accusation because there is a distrust in the integrity of the judiciary (like there was distrust of politicians). The core claim seem to be that CJI has departed from convention and seems to be allocating cases in ways his colleagues find objectionable. The gravity of this charge comes from implication that this is not just departure from convention but an attempt to fix cases or manipulate the outcome, perhaps in political sensitive cases. The charges are serious, demanding immediate attention.
Indeed, in times of deep institutional crisis, the invocation of moral conscience, a reminder that posterity will adversely judge those who sold their souls is, on the face of it, an important move by the four judges who have confirmed that the Indian judiciary is facing a serious crisis of legitimacy. Their concerns deserve serious attention. And given the judiciary’s critical role in the Constitutional mosaic, this is a moment of reckoning for other institutions as well, the executive and the legislature. There is no option now for anyone to turn an unseeing eye – either to the fact that there is a crisis within the judiciary, or to the reality that this crisis draws on a larger institutional disrepair while also deepening it.
Prima facie, the January 12 event is not simply about the personalities involved. It represents the culmination of gradual deepening of a number of faultlines namely delayed justice, lack of transparency and the all pervasive corruption in India’s judicial system, and highlights the urgency with which they need to be addressed. If handled well, this incident could be a moment for regeneration of the country’s judiciary.
The speed of justice delivery in India is reflective of the quality of our democracy. With over 3 crore cases pending nationwide, the judiciary needs to overcome several key challenges. The country still has only 18000 judges, almost three decades after Law Commission of India (LCI) recommended total number of 40000 judges. Another study by the LCI in 2014 suggested that over an additional 1000 judges are required to clear the backlog of pending cases in High Courts (HCs) alone.
The biggest problem, however, is the inability of our judiciary to benchmark limits for disposing of cases. According to National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), of the two crore cases pending in lower courts, over 10.83% were pending for over 10 years while 18.7% cases have been pending for the last 5 to 10 years. The government remains the biggest litigant in courts – the Centre and states account for nearly 70 per cent of cases in courts. So, both judiciary and the government must work together to find a solution to this problem urgently.
The working of the judiciary is under a blanket of secrecy, even when Right to Information (RTI) is a law in operation. There is a question mark against many appointments to HCs and the SC effected by the SC collegiums, a body of three senior-most judges of the SC. Under the Constitution, the government’s consultation with the CJI is essential before any appointments to the HCs and the SC are done. How helpless the polity looks when the highest body of justice delivery, the SC rejects establishment of NJAC for appointment of judges to the HCs and the SC. Transparency is greatly necessary for the functioning of a democratic system. Not very long ago, retired Justice Krishna Iyer of the SC had make a perceptive remark: “We are under a Constitution, but a Constitution is what the judges say it is, and the judiciary is the safeguard of our liberty and our property under the Constitution.”
With increasing corruption, faith among the Indian people in the judiciary has been badly shaken. Chief Justice P.N. Bhagwati said some three decades ago, on the eve of his retirement that judiciary corruption was growing by ‘leaps and bounds’. Not long ago, retired Chief Justice S.P Barucha also alleged that 15 per cent of the judiciary was corrupt. Judges and other luminaries have accepted the charge without a murmur because they know that it reflects the general impression.
Media has been regularly giving specific instances that so and so among the judges was not above board. Leading lawyers have come out in the open to point an accusing finger at certain judges. Bars have passed resolutions to that effect all across the country. A dominant public opinion today is that there is no hope for getting fair judges in India’s judicial system. Whether it is Kashmir, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat or West Bengal, the protest against corruption of judges is open and loud. The Supreme Court itself is in the dock because of allegations at the highest level.
Judgements speak for the judges so says Solomon of Courts. But over the years, they have learnt how to cover up their slant. Justice J.C. Verma, then the Chief Justice of India said: “If we (Judges) don’t question ourselves, the people may enact a law empowering something to question us.” The judiciary is one of the important pillars on which the edifice of democracy rests. The pillar is showing cracks. Parliament, representing the will of the people, needs to repair the pillar, not to make it still weak because of the taint that the judiciary has come to acquire. Some remedial steps need to be taken. Only then will the judiciary sparkle once again.
(The writer is a freelance journalist).
