<< Prev Page    |    1    |    2    |    3    |    4    |    5    |    6    |    7    |    8    |    9    |    10    |    Next Page >> WHY INDIA IS DEVOID OF RULE OF LAW? Balbir Singh Sooch M.A., L.L.B., Advocate Sikh Vichar Manch Dedicated to The Spirit of Millennium World Peace Summit August 2000. 8 The government spends only 0.2% of the GNP over the judiciary and the balance is made up by the judiciary itself, while other countries spend far more for the purpose. The government apathy is quite visible. According to a survey conducted, 50 judges should be provided for one million populations while only 11.25 judges are provided in India for one million people. There are normally 100-150 cases listed daily in almost each of the lower courts. These courts can hardly mark attendance and then adjourn the cases. There are no alternate arrangements for light and air as and when electricity goes off. The courts are so crowded that the condition of the judges, advocates, court staff and clients is worth seeing rather than explaining. The persons inside the courtroom need pity rather than anything else. Under such circumstances, a poor litigant is handicapped to produce any witness in the court, because the case is likely to be adjourned and the witnesses have to go back without being examined. When any witness, once sees the scene in the courtroom, he needs a heavy pressure to re-visit the courtroom and thus the cases remains pending for very long time. In these circumstances, one can only imagine as to how one can get justice. The lower court judges feel dejected in absence of their promotions. Thirteen thousands judges in the country, in protest against the deliberation of the conference of Chief Justices, have given a memorandum to the Prime Minister, Sh Atal Bihari Vajpai that 50% vacancies in the High Courts be filled from amongst them. They lose patience and feel dejected with the result that the court work suffers. Some judicial officers complain in private of interference of the administration and the politicians into judicial matters. The courts are unable to impart justice because of the rampant inefficiency of the investigating agencies and thus the rate of convictions has gone very low. Many legislators being corrupt and inefficient, the people cannot get justice for want of good and simple laws. For an example, the Income Tax Act of 1961 has been amended 400 times so far. Thirty million cases are learnt to be lying pending decisions, Justice J.S. Verma, Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission is of the view that because of shortage of judges, it may take 350 more years to dispose of these cases. High Courts are seen crowded by the victims of the government institutions, waiting for justice. In Bombay High Court only, there were 2402 cases pending decisions, connected with the Government institutions during the first 5 months of year 2000. The Chief Justice of India, Dr. A.S. Anand has expressed his grief that ' the government, being the biggest litigant, does not a feel a bit of the judiciary. The government knows that the judiciary needs more courts and judges but it is not prepared to appoint more judges. The rulers are generally reluctant to relish and abide by the decisions announced by the courts. For an example, the Supreme Court further widened the scope of Article 21 (right to life) by declaring that unpolluted air is also the fundamental right to life. Like other decisions announced for the preservation of Human Rights, the decision about the pollution has been thrown in the waste paper basket by the government The government intentionally overlooks the courts because the leaders in power are themselves standing in the dock in the courts. The N.N. Vohra report clearly proves a nexus of politicians, high officers and criminals. The criminals operate in connivance of government machinery. It is not improbable that in case some impartial authorities start a chain of inquiries against public leaders, police and the bureaucracy for amassing wealth and disproportionate assets as compared to their known sources of income; any person who has tasted power may come out scot-free. Large number of persons in power understand that they themselves are no less criminals and that is why they are keeping their eyes shut about the courts. S. Parkash Singh Badal, the Chief Minster of Punjab showing courage in a public meeting in village Humbran, near Ludhiana, asked the audience to name anybody who had taken bribe from anybody? Instantly, the people started one after one, naming the corrupt including two cabinet ministers. Mr. Badal, immediately left the meeting entrusting further proceedings to the district officers. He had then perceived that the day was not far when the public would not spare the names of his own family and other relatives whom the public had to give huge amounts. He has never again dared to repeat the above question in any public meeting, because he is aware that majority of complaints would point their fingers even towards his family. Because of unrestricted loot, everybody is in hurry to take to public life. Today persons dealing in illegal business, land grabbers and looters have become multi-millionaires and even cabinet ministers are being named. When a government likes to run its affairs in such a manner, how can it strengthen the judiciary where the offenders could be taken to task and they would have to pay a heavy price? Instead, the government is in hurry to apply fetters to the judiciary through a National Judicial Commission, though the supreme court is trying to preserve its right of appointment of judges and preparing of directive rules for the courts, Chief Justice of India Mr. Anand seems to be a far-sighted judge and well aware that the leaders in power are out to destroy, what remains of the judicial edifice. He knows that the previous policy regarding transfer of judges has proved ruinous. Law making bodies and the executive are already in the clutches of corruption. Mr. N. Vittal, the Central Vigilance Commissioner has remarked about the spread of corruption in country as "this is fatal for the rule of law and justice. The term "corruption" is no more limited to the actions covered by the Prevention of Corruption Act. Any act or omission, which aims as shielding a corrupt public servant whether he is law maker or a bureaucrat, is a form of corruption which may not necessarily involve monetary consideration but surely nepotism. Coercion, whether in the form of a threat or allurement with an ulterior motive to cause further harassment to the innocent or victims of crime, should also be viewed as corruption". While the directive by the Supreme Court to extend autonomy to the Central Vigilance Commission was underway; the government enacted a law prohibiting the Central Vigilance Commission not to take up cases of corruption against the government; and the bureaucracy. The well-known columnist Mr. Kuldip Nayyar in a dramatic and conspiratorial manner pleaded in favor of the government that Central Vigilance Commission has the arms in the CBI which has already been politicized i.e. it is no more impartial. It is true because several courts have in the past, declared the evidence produced by the CBI, as fabricated and unbelievable. He suggested some other independent agency like Lok Pal (ombudsman) should do the job against the politicians. Mr. Nayyar added that the government has not clipped the wings of Mr. Vittal but has restricted him from becoming Mr. T.N. Seshan (former the chief election commissioner). Similarly, the Punjab government through a notification has restricted the powers of the Punjab Vigilance Bureau with the remarks that being in the pay of the corrupt people, this department is of no use any longer, meaning that the thief catchers have themselves become thieves. Now, there seems no remedy and the thieves and the corrupt should be allowed to operate. In this way, the government has enhanced the malady. This must be in the interest of the ruling party. There seems now no doubt that the ruling clique is in partnership with the corrupt. Law analysts admit that cause of corruption in the judiciary is also due to the negligence and lack of will on the part of the judiciary as well as the Bar who do not pay sincere attention to it. They unanimously agree that in order to get rid of corruption, the Contempt of Courts Act should be so amended that transparency and accountability in law courts is doubly encouraged. Attorney General Soli Sorabji is of the view that there are only a few chances for unveiling the judicial corruption because no judge can indulge in corruption without the active partnership of the advocates and the carelessness on the part of others; and such advocates should be excommunicated from the society, after identifying them. But it is absurd to disbelieve the acts of corruption prevalent in the judicial system Justice B.P. Jiwan Reddy, Chairman of the Law Commission is of the view that the judges, advocates and the investigation agencies are all responsible for the deterioration of the judicial system for eradication of crime. Speaking at the golden jubilee celebrations of the Supreme Court, the executive and judiciary headed by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpai and Chief Justice of India Adrash Sen Anand respectively found fault in each other for the snail's pace of administering justice. Justice Anand blamed the centre and the state governments for delay in appointment of judges leading to a huge backlog of cases while Vajpayee said, "there is an all pervasive perception that the law has become a shield of the unscrupulous." He further said," the judicial system justly invite derision and contempt." In turn, justice Anand said the responsibility for the backlog of cases was in no small measure due to the apathy of the government to the issues concerning judicial administration as recommendations for creation of 5000 more courts at different levels in various States were pending with Union and state governments but no action has been taken so far. The former Chief Justice of India, ES Vankataramaiah had said that 90% of the men in black robes were corrupt. The judges are contravening the old code of conduct and accepting. "feasting" from members of the lawyers practicing before them. He said," judiciary in India has deteriorated in standards because some of the judges are willing to be influenced by lavish parties and whisky bottles------. It was hard to discard reports that every other son/son-in-law whatever his merit/lack of it, can be sure of earning an income of Rs. 10000/- per month. On this, Mr. Justice Rajinder Sacher remarked that Justice Venktaramaiah would have been stunned had he been properly informed that the figure mentioned by him was not for a month but probably less than that earned in a week. Politicians, businessmen, liquor barons etc. send valuable gifts and obtain benefits from th e judiciary as a matter of practice. Because of that, an addition has been made in the code of conduct to the effect that the judges are required to submit statements of assets acquired by them and their close relations in writing. Several attempts have been made in the past to enforce this code upon legislators and persons on the political posts but the rule could not be put to effect. There is no other reason except the nationalism in the nationalists is on the lowest ebb. Let us see, what happens to the judges' code of conduct? The introduction of the code points towards their guilt. The former Union Law Minister P. Shiv Shanker went a step ahead and declared that the judiciary itself was meant to render justice to the rich, diamond dealer and "wife burners". The politicians or their kin can only tell such home truths because others are threatened with the Contempt of Courts Act. Several allegations are levelled against the apex court, e.g. It acquits the influential persons by over-ruling it's own previous rulings. It has been reported that the Supreme Court does not respect its own earlier judgments and can easily unsettle settled case laws. Justice KS Hegde, a former eminent judge of the Supreme Court, had observed in his dissenting note in ITO Vs TSD Nadar (AIR 1968 SC 623): "...the decision of this court should not be overruled excepting under compelling circumstances...Every time this court overrules its previous decision, the confidence of the public in the soundness of the decision of this court is bound to be shaken...in law finality is of utmost importance..." In order to gain office after retirement, the judges collaborate with the government. Another code that also bars going in for elective offices seems to have been observed in breach. Sitting judges of the high court have been contesting various offices in clubs and other societies. In an embarrassing incident a couple of years ago, a sitting judge of Supreme Court contesting for office at the Indian Law Institute was defeated by a lawyer. At that time, rumours were rife that an attempt was even made to persuade the then Chief Justice of India to exercise his administrative power to nullify the result. Fortunately, he declined. But all this amounted to an unedifying spectacle. Twenty-five years ago, the Indira Gandhi government armed itself with a Supreme Court Constitution Bench verdict which held that citizens had no right to move the courts against detention orders during the emergency. The 4:1 verdict, with Justice HR Khanna dissenting had forfeited the judiciary's powers under Article 226 (for high courts) and 32 (for the supreme court) to entertain writ petitions regarding violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and liberty. The judgement, being described as a "horrible" piece of judicial action, had overruled the views taken by at least nine high courts that no order, presidential or judicial, could deprive the citizens of their fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and liberty. The high courts said that though the emergency barred the enforcement of certain fundamental rights, it did not abrogate the rule of law and did not allow the authorities to violate it with impunity. Supreme Court is being blamed for assisting and supporting the demolition of the Babri Mosque. Supreme Court is also being criticized for its hand in getting delayed the decisions in important and crucial cases.    << Prev Page    |    1    |    2    |    3    |    4    |    5    |    6    |    7    |    8    |    9    |    10    |    Next Page >>