The Indian Express: New Delhi: Monday, July 23, 2018.
There is “at
present no proposal” to bring a fresh Judicial Standards and Accountability
Bill aimed at laying down judicial standards and establishing processes for
removal of judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
The
Department of Justice said this in response to a query under the Right to
Information Act (RTI) seeking to know the current status of the Bill.
The reply
stated that the original Bill “was passed by Lok Sabha on 29.03.2012 but the
Bill could not be taken up for discussion in the Rajya Sabha as Parliament was
adjourned”.
Subsequently,
“however, the Bill could not be considered and lapsed due to dissolution of the
15th Lok Sabha”, the department said, adding, “at present there is no proposal
to bring a fresh Bill”.
The 2010
version of the Bill had come in the wake of questions raised on conduct of
judges of the higher judiciary and rising allegations of corruption against
judges and sought to put in place a mechanism to make them more accountable.
The Bill
proposed to make it mandatory for judges to declare their assets and
liabilities and that of their spouses and children.
It called
upon judges to follow certain standards of conduct. Any violation of these
standards could lead to complaints to a proposed National Judicial Standards
Oversight Committee.
Currently,
the procedure for complaints against judges of the Supreme Court and High Court
is governed by the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 under which only an MP can make
such complaints through a motion presented in Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha.
But the Bill
sought to enable any person, besides MPs, to make a complaint to the proposed
Oversight Committee.
It forbid the
judges from contesting elections to any office of a club, society or other
association or having close association or close social interaction with
individual members of the Bar. It also forbid them from permitting any member
of his or her family or other close relative who is a member of the Bar to
appear before them or be associated in any manner with a cause to be dealt with
by them. It also forbid them from entering into public debate or expressing
views in public on political matters or on matters which are pending or are
likely to arise for their judicial determination.
The Bill,
however, met with resistance from a section of the legal fraternity which felt
that it would compromise judicial independence.
The proposed
law subsequently went into cold storage. However, the need for such a
legislation once again came up for public debate following the January 12 press
conference by four senior judges of Supreme Court in which they raised
questions regarding the functioning of the apex court.
.JPG)
.JPG)
