The recent comments made by the Allahabad High Court judge alleged against the Minority community at an event have reignited debates on judicial conduct and accountability.
Background
Alleged Communal Statements: Statements included references to polygamy, Halala, triple talaq, and the Uniform Civil Code.
Supreme Court’s Response: It said details have been asked from the Allahabad High Court and that the “matter is under consideration”.
About Code of Conduct Of Judges
The Code of Conduct for Judges refers to a set of ethical guidelines and standards that judges must adhere to in order to maintain integrity, impartiality, and public confidence in the judicial system.
Codes of conduct are essential to guide judges in navigating the complexities of their role while maintaining public trust.
Necessity of a Code of Conduct for Judges in India
Safeguarding Judicial Integrity: Judicial integrity is a cornerstone of strong judicial systems and a necessary prerequisite for the rule of law, the right to a fair trial and the public trust in the judiciary.
The Code of Conduct For Judges ensures that judges maintain impartiality and independence in their judgments.
Prevents any behavior that could undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
Upholding Public Trust: Judicial authority is rooted in public acceptance and faith in the system.
Ethical conduct reassures citizens of the judiciary’s fairness and transparency.
Consequences for Judges Who Violate the Code of Conduct in IndiaImpeachmentThe most severe consequence for a judge in India found guilty of misconduct is impeachment.Under Article 124(4) of the Indian Constitution, a judge of the Supreme Court or High Court can be removed through impeachment by Parliament for proven misbehavior or incapacity.The process requires a motion to be introduced in either House of Parliament, followed by investigation and a vote. The motion must be approved by a majority of two-thirds of the members present and voting in both Houses.In House Procedure: As per the established “In-house procedure” for the Higher Judiciary, the Chief Justice of India is competent to receive complaints against the conduct of Judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justices of the High Courts. Similarly, the Chief Justices of the High Courts are competent to receive complaints against the conduct of High Court Judges.Public Reprimand or Suspension: For less severe violations, judges may receive a formal reprimand or temporary suspension from their duties.The severity of the action depends on the nature of the violation and its impact on the judiciary’s integrity.Transfer to Another Bench: In some instances, a judge found guilty of misconduct may be transferred to another bench or location as a corrective measure.
Guidance in Complex Situations: Provides judges with a structured framework to navigate ethical dilemmas.
Helps avoid conflicts of interest and maintain professional standards.
Ensuring Accountability: Establishes benchmarks for acceptable behavior in and out of court.
Promotes accountability within the judiciary, safeguarding its credibility.
Strengthening the Rule of Law: Ethical conduct by judges reinforces the principles of justice, equality, and fairness.
Enhances the judiciary’s role as a guardian of the Constitution and democratic values.
Preventing Bias and Misconduct: Acts as a deterrent against personal bias or misconduct that could affect judicial decisions.
Promoting Diversity and Inclusivity: Codes like the Bangalore Principles emphasise understanding and respecting societal diversity.
Helps judges treat all litigants equally, irrespective of their background.
Protecting Judicial Independence: Preserves the judiciary’s autonomy by fostering self-regulation and discipline.
Code of Conduct For Judges In India
The Supreme Court of India, in its full Court meeting on 7th May, 1997, adopted two Resolutions namely
“The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life” which lays down certain judicial standards and principles to be observed and followed by the Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
“In-house procedure” for taking suitable remedial action against judges who do not follow universally accepted values of Judicial life including those included in the Restatement of Values of Judicial life.
Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002): In 2003, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights adopted the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct,
It presents a framework to regulate judicial conduct.
Maintaining Confidence: Judges’ conduct, both in and out of court, must enhance confidence in their impartiality and independence.
The behaviour of a judge must “reaffirm the people’s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary”
Freedom of Expression: Judges are entitled to freedom of speech but must exercise it to preserve judicial dignity and impartiality.
Diversity and Equality: Judges must understand and respect societal diversity and treat all individuals equally in judicial and personal conduct.
Public Accountability: Judges must remain conscious of being under public gaze at all times.
Consequences of Lapses In Judicial Conduct
Undermine Judicial Credibility: Public trust in the judiciary diminishes, leading to skepticism about the fairness of judicial decisions.
Encourage Political Polarisation: Perceived biases in the judiciary can exacerbate divisions in society.
Impact the Rule of Law: Judicial impartiality is critical to upholding the rule of law.
Ethical lapses risk turning the judiciary into a partisan institution, threatening the democratic fabric.
Diminished judicial integrity can weaken democratic governance.
Increased Calls for Accountability: Incidents of unethical behavior can lead to public and institutional demands for accountability.
Could result in disciplinary action, including impeachment or voluntary retirement of the judge.
Global Best Practices:Queja System of Chile: The Queja system in Chile allows for the discipline of judges for acts that are not criminal but are considered immoral or unethical.It addresses judicial misconduct or abusive judicial actions that do not necessarily involve criminal offenses.United Kingdom: In 2004, the UK published its Guide to Judicial Conduct. Inspector General: Senegal and Tunisia have introduced the position of an inspector general to oversee judicial conduct. Magna Carta of European Judges: In 2000, the Council of Europe established the Council of European Judges (CCJE) to act as an advisory body to the Committee of Ministers and the Council of Europe on the independence and impartiality of judges.
Way Forward
Regular Training and Sensitization: Judges should undergo periodic training on ethical standards, societal diversity, and contemporary issues to align their perspectives with evolving societal norms.
Example: Judges should be counseled to avoid statements that suggest prejudice against individuals and groups or opinions about issues that may arise in litigation.
Enhanced Transparency: Judicial decisions and conduct must be transparent, fostering accountability and public trust.
Mechanisms for Ethical Oversight: Strengthening in-house grievance redressal systems and empowering oversight committees can ensure swift action against ethical violations.
Example: There is a need to reconsider the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010 that provided for establishing the National Judicial Oversight Committee, the Complaints Scrutiny Panel, and an investigation committee.
Advisory Councils: The Judicial ethics advisory committees can be established to address unresolved questions and guide judges who are uncertain about the propriety of their conduct.
These committees can be composed of sitting or retired judges.
For instance, most U.S. states have their own advisory committees to support judicial ethics.
Conclusion
Judges must uphold dignity and avoid behavior that undermines the judiciary’s integrity, ensuring public trust and confidence in justice.
As custodians of justice, their conduct in both personal and professional matters must inspire public confidence, reinforce trust in the rule of law, and reflect the highest ethical standards.
