Events
& Issues
New Delhi, 25 July 2018
Independence of Judiciary
VITAL FOR JUST SOCIAL ORDER
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Justice Ranjan Gogoi,
who is expected to be the next Chief Justice of India, recently analysed the
problems of the judiciary, more so because of the immense public faith and
reliance on this system. At a time, when people are losing faith in the
political system, the judiciary has possibly become the last bastion on which
the people can rely on.
Delivering the third
Ramnath Goenka Memorial lecture, Justice Gogoi rightly favoured a judiciary
that was more proactive with judges on the front foot to dispense justice. He
regretted the fact that dispensation of justice through prompt handling of
cases has not become possible as the judge has become “a workman with no
tools”, i.e. the required infrastructure is rather poor to cope with the huge
pendency of cases. In fact, the situation has reached a point, where proper
support facilities are not provided, specially at the lower levels, and thus
there is fear that the high regard for the judiciary may be fading slowly
fading away.
It is important to note
that momentous verdicts by the apex court--– whether in the realm of social, or
environment or political spheres -- have changed the face of the country and
ushered in a new understanding of the social polity. Verdicts relating to
corruption have been hailed with great acumen by the Supreme Court and
punishments have been bestowed on the guilty, sometimes on politicians, who
hold high positions of authority.
The
judiciary in any country is the custodian of the Constitution and guarantor of
the fundamental rights of the people. The institution is not only considered
the most sanctimonious pillar of the State but also a foundation on which
civilizations are built. All philosophies ungrudgingly acknowledge the independence
of the judiciary as a means to ensure social amity, political development,
peace and progress in any society.
The
judiciary in our country has passed through different phases. One of these is
known as ‘doctrine of necessity’, which undermined the role of judiciary. But
after the judicial movement, the institution started to regain its last glory.
There is no denying that
the judiciary has been playing a stellar role in transforming the
socio-political system of the country and judges have been at the forefront due
to their independence and judicious role in this regard. The exemplary steps
taken by the judiciary give confidence to the people that this wing of the
government is possibly the best arm compared with the political class and the Executive.
The present problem
of pendency of court levels, specially at lower levels, is obviously the result
of the government’s neglect and indifference. It goes without saying that this
situation has been continuing with little or no action on the part of the
government. While resource constraint may be cited as a reason, people would tend
to suspect that this neglect may be due to the fear that prompt disposal of
cases may expose the government’s misdeeds.
In recent times, growing
judicial activism has surfaced and raised a question. However, a section of
legal experts strongly believe that such an approach is necessary and in the
best interests of society. However, the Court
must take care to see that it does not overstep the limits of its judicial function
and trespass into areas which are reserved for the Executive and the Legislature
by the Constitution. However, clear violation of constitutional or
statutory provisions must be interfered by the apex judiciary.
For example, if a considered policy decision has been taken which is
not in conflict with any law or is not mala fide, it will not be in public
interest to require the court to go into and investigate those areas, which are
the function of the Executive. When two or more options or views are
possible and after considering these the government takes a policy decision it
is then still not the function of the court to go into the matter afresh and in
a way, sit in appeal over such a policy decision (Balco vs. Union of India
(2002) 2 SCC 333). Whatever method adopted by judiciary in adjudication,
it must be the procedure known to judicial tenets.
The challenge before
the judiciary is the need to give this institution greater attention and allow
it to play an independent role in society. Moreover, more funds need to be
allocated to improve infrastructure at the lower levels, set up fast track
courts as well as an additional bench of the High Court in an important city other
than the State capital. The judiciary has to reach out to the people with prompt
verdicts and making itself more approachable.
The notion that the
rich and the powerful have better bargaining power in the lower judiciary
should be dispelled. As the country marches ahead on both social and economic
front, there is need to assure the common man that the judiciary is neutral and
cannot be influenced by money or muscle power or other forms of authority. For
this, the higher judiciary should keep a watchful eye on the functioning of the
district and sub-divisional courts.
Another facet that
needs serious consideration is cases of alleged corruption cropping up against
some judicial officers and judges. Though ‘corruption’ among politicians and
bureaucrats is quite common and known to the people, this hasn’t been the case
with the judiciary, particularly in the past, where integrity and discipline
are acknowledged standards. People expect the judiciary to dispense justice without
fear and favour and any deviation would betray this trust.
Political analysts
believe that judicial activism has increased due to the rather inefficient
functioning of the government and non-implementation of policies and rules in
various sectors. The outreach of judiciary has thus widened to ensure justice
to the people. If proper analysis is carried out, so-called judicial activism,
which politicians mostly attribute to denigrate the judiciary, may not be
tenable, judging from the point of social justice.
It is believed that
in the years to come the judiciary would continue to play its significant role
in socio-political transformation and give strength to society to follow its
cherished goals of justice, equality and fraternity. However, the biggest
challenge remains whether the judiciary retains its true independence and
judicious manner of analysis and judgment.
One may mention here
an observation of former Chief Justice, R M Lodha, who aptly pointed out: “I am
sure you will have a strong rule of law because it is the independence of
judiciary that leads to confidence in the minds of people that there is a
judiciary that will come to their aid and rescue if there is wrong (done) to
them by the Executive or anybody”.---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|