MPs for tougher judges’ assets law

Setting the stage for another round of tension between the Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary, the Opposition today refused to accept the Government’s Bill that makes it mandatory for judges to declare their assets but insulates them from any questioning by the public. The Government is now expected to go back to the Chief Justice of India who has strongly argued for a law that’s not used as a tool in the hands of “disgruntled” to embarrass the judges. Amid strident protests in the Rajya Sabha, Law Minister M Veerappa Moily was forced to defer the introduction of the Judges (Declaration of Assets and Liabilities) Bill. Section 6(1) of this Bill says: “...the declaration made by a Judge to the competent authority shall not be made public or disclosed, and shall not be called for put into question by any citizen, court or authority, and no Judge shall be subjected to any inquiry or query in relation to the contents of the declaration by any person.”It was this provision that invited sharp criticism from the BJP and Left parties who said it not only violated the Right to Equality — by treating judges as a special category different from other public servants as well as the common man — but was also ultra vires of the Constitution. Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley said the provision was violative of Article 19(1)(a) which, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, also included the Right to Information. Citing a similar law with regard to the people wanting to contest elections, he said candidates are told not just to file an affidavit making such a disclosure “but it is also an inherent content of Article 19(1)(a) and the Right to Information, which is included there, that assets, the declaration of which is made, should be made public”.Jaitley said a different interpretation of Article 19(1)(a) for the judges could not be sustained under law. He also said that he was “given to understand” from reports that this was the first time in history that before introduction in Parliament, the Bill had been circulated among members of judiciary. “Parliament does not abdicate law-making function to any other institution, however honourable or respectable or competent that institution may be,” Jaitley said. CPM members Brinda Karat and Sitaram Yechury also demanded that the Bill be withdrawn because of the same reasons. But the most stinging remark came from noted lawyer Ram Jethmalani who described the bill as “a conspiracy in corruption”. “What this bill does is that it creates suspicion in the public mind that the judiciary is seeking favours from the executive. The favour being that you put us on a higher pedestal than any other public servant in the country. This privileged position, that the judges are seeking from the executive, makes them totally subservient to the executive,” he said.Even Congress MP Jayanthi Natarajan opposed the introduction on the ground that the proposed law could violate the Right to Information Act which had been “so vitally welcomed by the people”. Moily tried to justify the inclusion of Clause 6 by saying that this was only the first step towards making the judiciary accountable. He urged the House to let the Bill be introduced as the government was already working on more comprehensive judicial reforms, including a Judges Inquiry Bill, which would address all the concerns of the members.However, the Opposition benches refused to relent. Deputy Chairman K Rehman Khan, quoting an earlier ruling of the House, said the question on whether the Bill can be introduced in the House or not has to be decided by voting. Realising that the members of the Opposition present in the House far outnumbered that of the government, Moily, at this point, decided to defer the introduction of the Bill, thereby saving the government the embarrassment of being out-voted by the opposition. Today’s sharp reactions also reflect feelings expressed by ministers at the July 23 meeting of the Union Cabinet, where the draft of the proposed law failed to enthuse some ministers. The Law Ministry plans to hold a national consultation on judicial reforms on August 29-30, where, apart from other issues, the proposed law on assets will also be discussed. “Judiciary can’t be treated like the executive because independence of the judiciary is enshrined in the Constitution. The idea is not to expose them (judges) to vexatious litigation. People can misuse the information to intimidate good judges. We want to prevent it,” he told The Indian Express.The Congress tried to downplay the Government’s failure to introduce the Bill. Said spokesman Abhishek Singhvi: “This is part of parliamentary practice and procedure... This was a simple deferment”.

"Loved reading this piece by Jithendra.H.J?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group