25 Feb 2024 5:20 AM GMT
While speaking at a seminar on Judicial Accountability, Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora voiced her concern about the master of roster system being unregulated. She said that sometimes the office of this roster of system is inclined more towards the rule of a man than toward the rule of law. At the same time, Arora stressed the need for not only transparency but also accountability in this system.
Taking a cue from this, she also highlighted the absence of a grievance redressal mechanism system to address concerns regarding the questionable functioning of the master of roster system.
“In a democratic set-up, howsoever high is accountable for the acts done by him or her. The master of the roster today is unregulated and requires much more transparency and accountability for the acts that are being done by that high office. Also, there is no grievance redressal mechanism system against the doubtful working of the master of roster system. The office of this roster of system is sometimes inclined more towards the rule of a man than toward the rule of law. The discretion that we depose in an individual is always antithetical to the rule of law. Discretion given to an individual is always antithetical to the rule of law. There is no check and balance in the present system of Master of Roster."
Arora also raised concerns that the Chief Justice, one of the equals, should not exercise any superior authority.
“We have said that a Chief Justice is one amongst the equals. Now, if the Chief Justice is one amongst the equals, the power that is a master of the roster cannot and ought not to be used as any superior authority. And this power has to be exercised by him in a manner which is fair, just and transparent.”
The seminar, hosted today by Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR), was on "Supreme Court Judicial Administration & Management- Issues & Concerns". Alok Prasanna, co-founder of the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, moderated the session. Notable, a gathering of former Supreme Court and High Court judges, senior advocates, and members of society assembled for the seminar.
At the commencement of her address, Arora underscored that if we have to remain democratic, our judiciary's independence must also stay. The senior counsel also remarked about Umar Khalid's withdrawal of his bail application from the Supreme Court, and wondered what is the public message from this.
“If in Umar Khalid, you withdrew the matter from the Court saying that you are unlikely to get justice, what is the message being sent out from the Supreme Court? That is the loss of public confidence in an institution altogether.”
Moving ahead with her address, Arora expressed her surprise at how, in recent years, most cases have been decided against the individuals and not the State. Further, she stressed the need for the Courts to act independently and preserve themselves as protectors of our constitution.
“I must say that in recent years, most of the issues that concern our rights have been decided against us. We are lucky to have these recent couple ones.”
“If the Supreme Court and our Courts have to preserve themselves in the position that they occupy, as pillar of democracy, as protectors of our constitution, as our position against the might of an authoritarian State, they will have act independently, impartially and not have to give out any message of prefixing of matches.”
In this context, Arora also spoke about the recent death of Russian opposition leader and a prominent critic of the ruling party, Alexei Navalny. We are not having very far different in our home turf, Arora said before adding: “There its an excepted fact worldwide that you are not going to get justice out of those systems. Are we wanting to call our courts the same in a democracy. No, we do not.”
Talking about the roster system, she said it needs a lot of introspection, given that it is leading to nowhere, and our young bar members have started calling it match-fixing.
“That the roster system, in its current form, is not taking us anywhere. When our youngsters on the bar starts calling match fixing, I think it needs a lot of introspection”
She also referred to the roster notified by the CJI, effective from January 2, 2024. As per this, around thirty judges of the Supreme Court are assigned the roster for criminal matters. At this, she contemplated: “So, if we have, even for six months, a roster hearing criminal cases …please transparently declare which benches are likely to hear what category of cases. Once you have declared that as a roster, the earmarking of cases must completely be through automation, and there must be no hand that comes in between that thereafter. No one at all.”
The event can be watched live here.
Live updates from the event can be tracked here.
Also Read -
Master Of Roster Business Should Be Dealt By First 3 Judges: Justice Kurian Joseph
Why Can't Supreme Court Take Judicial Notice Of UAPA & PMLA Misuse? Senior Advocate Mihir Desai
Media As Fourth Pillar Of Democracy Has Failed The Country: Justice Kurian Joseph