|
Under pressure from within and outside, judges of the Supreme Court of India agree to declare their assets and wealth via declarations on the court’s website http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in
Judges of the country’s top court have agreed to put their assets in the public domain, after months of debate that rocked the judiciary as well as Parliament, and just two days after Chief Justice of India (CJI) K G Balakrishnan said that, in the absence of a law to make public the disclosure of assets, a consensus had to be developed among judges in this regard. The decision, ostensibly to silence criticism of the Supreme Court’s perceived reluctance to be more transparent, was taken at a meeting of all 23 judges early this week. A senior judge present at the meeting said: “The decision was taken after a unanimous view emerged among members of the bench to make the details public.” Another judge said it had been decided by consensus that details of assets held by every judge of the Supreme Court would be revealed on its website. Earlier this month, the government was forced to defer introduction of a Bill in the Rajya Sabha that exempts judges from making public disclosures of their income and assets. Many MPs, including some from the treasury benches, raised objections to critical provisions of the Judges (Declaration of Assets and Liabilities) Bill. The Bill sought to make it mandatory for judges to declare their assets and liabilities to a ‘competent authority’, but stated that such a declaration would neither be made public nor be questioned by any citizen, a provision the higher judiciary was seen to be rooting for. This provision, contained in Clause 6 of the Bill, drew sharp criticism from political parties and civil society. Although all Supreme Court judges routinely declare their assets to the CJI, as do high court judges to their respective chief justices, there is no standard format in which they do so. Chief Justice Balakrishnan had been under pressure from all quarters -- the public, members of the judicial fraternity, former CJIs and parliamentarians -- to set an example of transparency by making details of judges’ assets available to the public. He resisted the move, saying a law would first have to be enacted to protect judges. Otherwise, such information could be misused by vested interests to pressure judges, eventually eroding the independence of the judiciary. Days later, the CJI came under fresh pressure when a Karnataka High Court judge threw him a challenge by openly declaring his assets in a letter to lawyers and activists asking for greater transparency in the judiciary. However, although political parties and legal experts have welcomed the decision, civil society is unlikely to be mollified by what they consider a half-measure. The Delhi-based Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reform, which is spearheading the public movement, has described the judges’ concession on asset declaration as no more than a “welcome first step”. Further steps that need to be taken -- reforms relating to the appointment and disciplining of judges -- are far more critical to the quality and integrity of the judiciary, it said. The assets controversy, which is an unintended consequence of the four-year-old Right to Information Act, is a small part of the larger, longer and more intractable struggle for judicial accountability. Source: The Indian Express, August 26, 2009
The Telegraph, August 26, 2009
http://www.ptinews.com, August 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk, August 2009
|
