Towards A Movement For Judicial Reforms

AUGUST 2 witnessed a turning point in the campaign against corruption in judiciary and for judicial accountability. Held at New Delhi, a convention resolved to launch a people’s movement for reform of the judicial system so that people may get justice against the rich and powerful, against those who are part of or close to the establishment.

The convention was organised by the Committee or Judicial Accountability (COJA), and more than 20 organisations joined it. These included the All India Lawyers Union, Indian Association of Lawyers, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, People’s Union for Democratic Rights, Citizens for Democracy, Delhi University Teachers Association, Jawaharlal Nehru University Teachers Association, Jan Hastakshep, All India Democratic Women’s Association, Mahila Dakshata Samity, Centre of Indian Trades Unions, All India Trade Union Congress, Indian Federation of Trade Unions, Hind Mazdoor Sabha, National Alliance of People’s Movement, Kisan Sabha, Justice Party, Academy of Socio-Legal Studies, Communist Party of India (Marxist), Communist Party of India, Forward Bloc, CPI(ML-New Democracy), and Revolutionary Socialist Party.

JUDICIARY ON VERGE OF TOTAL COLLAPSE

The invitation for the convention pointed out that the administration of justice in the country is on the verge of a total collapse. The problem has assumed an immense proportion, as is evident from a string of recent judicial scandals all over the country. It emphasised that the ruling establishment does not need a pro-people judiciary because it has the advantage of power and money. It is the weak and the poor, the common consumers of justice, who want justice usually against those who are part of the establishment.

Unfortunately we don’t have an organised movement of consumers of justice, for judicial reforms. The ruling establishment, therefore, does not feel any pressure to implement such reforms. On the other hand, retrograde policies in the form of enactments and administration of justice are being implemented. Many a time courts acted as the establishment’s handmaids to implement regressive measures, hitting hard at the people’s rights and even subverting constitutional provisions. Since the judiciary is not accountable, it has a free run.

In his key-note address, Justice P B Sawant, a former Supreme Court judge, gave a stirring call to fight corruption and lack of accountability of the judiciary in India, particularly when the higher judiciary has assumed enormous powers, more than in any other country. He observed that with the unmasking of a spate of scandals, the government has hurriedly come out with a bill for the formation of a National Judicial Commission comprising senior Supreme Court judges, a nominee of the prime minister and the law minister, for appointments to higher judiciary. This bill, he observed, is a sham and is bound to make the situation worse. He then commended the bill suggested by the COJA for the constitution of a full time National Judicial Commission that will have its own investigative machinery and will be entrusted with exclusive power to appoint judges and take disciplinary action against them, including removal. The suggestion contemplates a commission with members from government, judiciary, opposition and public, with a secured tenure of five years.

GOVT OUT TO TIGHTEN CONTROL

The convention was addressed, among others, by former law minister Shanti Bhushan; senior advocate Anil Dewan; CPI(M) Lok Sabha group’s leader Somnath Chatterjee; M K Pandhe (CITU); Kalindi Deshpande (AIDWA); Udit Raj (Justice Party); senior journalist Prem Shankar Jha; former solicitor general T R Andhyarugina, and West Bengal assembly speaker H A Halim.

All the speakers condemned the National Judicial Commission bill presented by the government as a sham and directed to tighten the government’s stranglehold on the judiciary in the matter of appointments, making it worse than before. Justice Sawant emphatically pointed out that failure of the system of impeachment has been established in the case of Supreme Court judge Ramaswami. There is no transparency in the system of appointments and it works to divide the spoils among senior judges. Now the government will have a greater say if the bill is enacted into a law. After retirement, judges are not allowed to take up any jobs or do practice or take up arbitration cases. This may be compensated by increasing the age of retirement and by lifetime pensions equal to salaries, as provided in some countries.

Special note was taken of the fact that in many cases the judiciary is playing a regressive role and implementing by judicial fiats the government’s economic agenda, together with other anti-democratic, anti-secular and anti-people measures. We have seen cases in which the government found it hard to implement its regressive measures, and the judiciary came to its rescue with pronouncements that are not open to challenge. Moreover, arbitrary references to contempt of court, and the Supreme Court’s ruling in Veeraswami’s case that corruption cases against a judge cannot be investigated without the chief justice of India’s permission, have given the judges immunity that is being widely abused.

At the conclusion, the convention unanimously adopted a resolution expressing its disquiet at the alarming level the corruption of judiciary has reached over the years. The main reason is the complete lack of accountability in higher judiciary. The resolution pointed out that exercising their arbitrary and unlimited powers, judges act as the accusers, prosecutors and judges in violation of the canons of natural justice and civilised jurisprudence. The power of contempt act has been misused to prevent an exposure of corruption and misbehaviour in the judiciary. This too is due to the completely non-transparent system of appointments and improper recording of judicial proceedings. The need for judicial accountability and transparency is now all the more pressing due to the vast powers the judiciary has assumed in recent years --- bringing to the fore judicial arbitrariness that is used to legitimatise the undemocratic, anti-poor, anti-people and anti-secular stances of the state. This has led to the situation where poor and weak have had to bear the brunt.

The judges’ casteist and communal prejudices too have been reflected in many pronouncements. It is necessary to ensure that persons appointed to the judiciary have commitment to the constitutional values of secularism, social justice and democracy.

The resolution strongly emphasised the need of a full time National Judicial Commission with exclusive power for appointments to and disciplinary action against higher judiciary. The resolution appealed to the parliament to overrule the Supreme Court judgement in Veeraswamy’s case so as to remove obstacles in the way of criminal investigation against judges. It also urged the parliament to amend the contempt of court act by removing “scandalising the court or lowering the authority of the court” from the definition of contempt.

SEEKERS OF JUSTICE MUST TAKE UP CUDGEL

Another unanimously adopted resolution pointed out that corruption and other inherent defects have put the seekers of justice in a highly vulnerable position. They are pitted against powerful persons who are badly exploiting this corrupt system. No relief can be secured where archaic laws and procedures lead to unbearable expenses, inordinate delays and denial of justice in a contest against the rich and the politically and socially powerful adversaries.

It is thus evident that none in the establishment is interested in changing the system of which they are themselves a part. It is only the seekers of justice who have to take up the cudgels to fight the corruption, change the system and make it sensitive to the common people’s needs. The resolution stressed that it is of utmost urgency that a movement be built against corruption and for changing the judicial system so as to bring it within the people’s reach and make it effective against those who wield economic, social and political power. Such a movement is possible only when those who seek and need justice, the consumers of justice, become an active part of it and do not leave it to the government, the judiciary, the legal fraternity and those in the establishment. The convention reminded that it has taken initial step in this direction and a number of organisations, representing sections of consumers of justice, have come together for this campaign. The convention resolved to build a wider movement for reform in the judicial system by involving the consumers of justice throughout the country.

The sponsoring committee was entrusted with the job of working out and finalising in a month’s time the proposals to forge the movement.