Presence Of Political Figures At Private Events Hosted By Sitting Or Recently Retired Judges Erodes Perception Of Impartiality: CJAR

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) on Thursday expressed concern over PM Modi's visit to CJI DY Chandrachud's visit residence for Ganpati Puja. Taking note of the pictures and videos of the private religious ceremony, CJAR in a statement said that the incident has set an unwarranted example and undermines the perception of judicial independence, raises critical questions about the separation of powers and the impartiality of the judiciary.

“Established practices of judicial conduct place an emphasis on maintaining public confidence through probity in the interaction between high constitutional functionaries. As then CJI MN Venkatachaliah put it to then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, the relationship between the judiciary and executive has to be correct, not cordial, and cordiality between court and government has no place in our constitutional scheme of checks and balances. The judiciary, which holds the responsibility of safeguarding the Constitution and ensuring justice without fear or favor, must be seen as entirely independent from the Executive branch.”

"The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life, adopted by the Supreme Court of India in 1997, clearly states that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done, and any act which erodes the credibility of this perception must be avoided. A judge is also required to maintain "a degree of aloofness consistent with the dignity of his office." The presence of political figures at private events hosted by sitting or recently retired judges (and vice versa) erodes this perception of impartiality. More so, when the political figures are present in their institutional and not personal capacity and then use official channels of communication to broadcast pictures and videos to the public"., it added.

Recounting the incidents of reported impropriety in recent times, the statement flags clear departures from code of conduct. 

“In 2019, the then CJI hearing his own case violated all known judicial procedures and norms. Earlier this year, Abhijit Gangopadhyay, judge of the Calcutta High Court resigned and immediately joined the BJP raising serious questions of judicial propriety and impartiality. Post retirement, judges have become governors and Rajya Sabha members, without any cooling off period, raising more serious concerns regarding judicial independence.”

The CJAR in its statement highlighted the fact that both the Union of India and State Governments are the largest litigants before the courts. Such close association between the judiciary and political leadership undermines the ability of the judiciary to impartially adjudicate cases involving the government and the ruling political party. It casts doubt as to the objectivity of an institution tasked with checking executive power.