28 Feb 2024 9:27 AM GMT
Recently, advocate Kamini Jaiswal, while speaking at a seminar on judicial accountability, stressed how the post-retirement benefits for judges are the most dangerous part of the judicial system. Jaiswal averred that there is no reason why judges should be looking up to the government for such benefit. Marking how such benefits affect the system, she said judges work 'very well' until they reach their retirement age and turn a 'new cover' which is not a 'nice cover'.
“There is no reason why they should be looking up to government or anybody for a post-retirement benefit. You know, that is the most dangerous part of this system…you find judges working very well till they reach the top. When they are reaching near their retirement age, you find a lot of them suddenly turning a new cover. Which is not really a nice cover.”
The seminar, hosted (on 25 February) by the 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 beginning of her address, the counsel expressed her concern about how a basic issue of listing and fixing is being discussed.
“We are today, discussing very basic issue and which is listing and fixing. Which really saddens me. Where we have come to and what we were.,” she stated.
Jaiswal recalled how, in the early 1980s, there was a uniform procedure. Advocates were given dates depending upon their explanation of the urgency in the matter. Thus, Jaiswal stated, there were some unwritten guidelines even for listing matters.
“The judiciary has its independence, if it wants it. Now how much further independent does a judiciary have to be? The judiciary will be as independent as it considers itself. A person has all the independence but if you decide not to exercise it, you decide not to appreciate it and you decide to be subservient to the master, there is nothing that can help you.,” Jaiswal added.
She went on to say that constituting benches is a very important factor in the functioning of the Chief Justice, and it must have some set down guidelines. Following this, she averred that once the roster is made the Chief Justice should not have any say in transferring matters from one bench to the other.
“I do not think that once the roster has been made, the Chief Justice should have any say in transferring matters from one bench to the other.”
She also proposed that in sensitive matters, the decision of bench composition should not be left on one individual. Rather, it must be decided by at least three senior-most Supreme Court judges.
“In super-sensitive matters where may be it is of national importance, or constitutional importance then obviously looking at the importance of the matter, it is necessary that the decision cannot be left to one individual. It has to be done by at least three senior-most judges of the Supreme court must together and decide which bench is to hear it.”
Taking a cue from this, Jaiswal highlighted how earlier, in the constitution benches, most senior judges constituted the bench because of the importance of the matter. However, today, the Chief Justice 'picks and chooses judges.'
Notably, before parting, Jaiswal said:
“You can everything in place, all law in place but it always depend on the man who mans the institution. So, law or practice, nothing can help you unless you have good appointees.”
The video of the event can be watched here.
Live updates can be read 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
Rules For Listing Violated In Many Cases In Supreme Court : Prashant Bhushan