Restatement of Values of Judicial Life

• 14 Sep 2024

For Prelims: Chief Justice of India, Supreme Court, Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, United Nations Convention against Corruption 

For Mains: Ethical Frameworks for Judiciary, Global Standards for Independence of the Judiciary 

Source: TH 

Why in News?

The recent visit of the Prime Minister of India to Chief Justice of India (CJI) residence has sparked controversy, particularly in the context of the "Restatement of Values of Judicial Life" adopted by the Supreme Court in 1997. 

Note: 

Socio-religious (personal) and administrative/judicial life of a public servant are distinct. The CJI (or any other public servant) cannot be questioned on personal life, as personal relationships fall outside the scope of judicial scrutiny. However, the judiciary must remain independent and free from undue influence, upholding the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

What is Restatement of Values of Judicial Life?

• The 'Restatement of Values of Judicial Life' is a code of judicial ethics adopted by the Supreme Court, serving as a guide for an independent and fair judiciary, ensuring the impartial administration of justice. 
• The Code Comprises 16 Points: 
  • Justice must not merely be done but it must also be seen to be done. Judges must avoid any actions that erode public confidence in impartiality of the judiciary.  
    • Accordingly, any act of a judge of the Supreme Court or a high court, whether in official or personal capacity, which erodes the credibility of this perception, has to be avoided. 
  • A judge should not contest the election to any office of a club, society or other association, except in a society or association connected with the law. 
  • Close association with individual members of the bar, particularly those who practise in the same court, shall be avoided. 
  • A judge should not allow any member of their immediate family or a close relative who is a member of the Bar to appear before them or be involved in a case that they are handling. 
  • No member of a judge's family who is a member of the Bar shall be permitted to use the judge's residence or other facilities for professional work. 
  • A judge should practise a degree of aloofness (being distant) consistent with the dignity of his office. 
  • A judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a member of his family, a close relation or a friend is concerned. 
  • A judge shall not engage in public debate or express political views on matters pending or likely to arise for judicial determination. 
  • A judge should let his judgments speak for themselves and not give media interviews. 
  • A judge shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from family, close relations and friends. 
  • A judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a company in which he holds shares is concerned unless he has disclosed his interest and no objection to his hearing and deciding the matter is raised. 
  • A judge shall not speculate in shares, stocks or the like. 
  • Judges should not engage in trade or business, directly or indirectly, but publishing legal work or hobby activities are exceptions. 
  • A judge should not solicit, accept, or associate with fundraising for any purpose. 
  • A judge should not seek any financial benefit in the form of a perquisite or privilege attached to his office unless it is clearly available. Any doubt on this behalf must be resolved and clarified through the Chief Justice. 
  • Judges must always be aware they are under public scrutiny and avoid any act or omission unbecoming of their high office. 

Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct

• In July 2006, the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) adopted a resolution recognizing the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as an important advancement and complement to the 1985 United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary. 
• The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct aim to set ethical standards for judges, providing a framework for regulating judicial behaviour and offering guidance on maintaining judicial ethics.  
  • The Principles recognize six core values: independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety, equality, and competence and diligence, which define the expected conduct for judges to effectively practise each value. 

1985 UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary 

• It was adopted at the Seventh UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, 1985 and endorsed by General Assembly resolutions 40/32 and 40/146.  
  • These principles aim to bridge the gap between ideal judicial independence and real-world practices, ensuring justice is maintained, human rights are protected, and the judiciary operates free from discrimination.  
  • Key aspects include guaranteed independence, impartial decision-making, exclusive jurisdiction, non-interference, and the right to a fair trial.  

What are the Other Major Concerns About Judicial Integrity in India? 

• Political Ambitions of Judges: Judges publicly resigning from their positions to enter politics has raised concerns about their commitment to the Constitution of India and the impartiality of their judicial decisions. 
  • Former Supreme Court judges accepting lucrative political positions or government roles immediately after retirement has led to allegations of favouritism and quid pro quo. 
  • Instances where judges deliver decisions that benefit the ruling party and later receive high-profile government positions, suggesting potential quid pro quo arrangements. 
• Transparency Issues: The opaque nature of how information is handled in significant cases compromises public confidence in the judicial process. 
• Conflict of Interest: Judges are expected to avoid conflicts of interest and maintain the integrity of the judicial process. 
  • Judges' involvement in political activities, particularly after making controversial statements and rulings while on the bench, raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest. 
• Public Trust and Confidence: The judiciary relies on public trust and confidence to fulfil its role. Judges' actions that undermine the perception of judicial integrity and impartiality erode public trust in the judicial system. 

Way Forward 

• Reinforce the adherence to the 'Restatement of Values of Judicial Life' and the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct. This can be done through mandatory training and regular refresher courses for judges. 
  • Establish independent bodies to periodically audit and review judicial conduct and adherence to ethical standards. 
• Leverage the Global Judicial Integrity Network which aims to assist judiciaries in strengthening judicial integrity and preventing corruption in the justice sector, in line with the United Nations Convention against Corruption.  
• Foster public engagement by organising forums or discussions where citizens can interact with the judiciary to understand its functions and decisions better. 
• Strengthen norms to ensure that judges who wish to enter politics must adhere to a cooling-off period and fully disclose any past judicial decisions that might be relevant. 
• Establish clear guidelines for judges taking up post-retirement roles, ensuring they do not compromise the integrity of their judicial decisions or suggest favouritism.

Drishti Mains Question: 

Discuss the 'Restatement of Values of Judicial Life' adopted by the Supreme Court of India. How does it aim to maintain the integrity and independence of the judiciary?