Why no questions are asked to retired activist judges: Former CJI Gogoi
New Delhi, May 14: Former Chief Justice of India and Rajya Sabha MP Ranjan Gogoi asked as to why no questions were being asked from "activist judges" and those taking commercial arbitration post-retirement.
The statement assumes significance as the former CJI was criticised by several retired judges for accepting the Rajya Sabha nomination.
Responding to a question on post-retirement assignments by judges, the former CJI said there were three categories of them -- "activist judges", those taking up commercial arbitrations and the those accepting other kinds of assignments.
Gogoi too formidable to be ruffled by sickening behaviour of politicians trapped in political disarr
"Why only it is the third category that draws all the flak? Why are no questions asked about the other two?", Gogoi said.
He was speaking at a webinar organised by Confederation of Alumni for National Law Universities Foundation in collaboration with a legal news portal on the topic, 'Ensuring an Independent Judiciary under our Constitution: Confronting the Contemporary Challenges'.
Gogoi said that the judiciary is not averse to criticism but there should be an honest, intellectual and academic exercise.
"The system (judicial) is not averse to criticism and there is room for improvement... Let there be an honest, intellectual and academic exercise so far as judgments are concerned. Do not impute motives. It is destructive," Gogoi said.
He took exception to an "ideological group of people", activists, intellectuals for giving "identification marks" to as to "who is an independent judge" and said that according to them a judge must be necessarily anti-establishment.
"He must be anti-authoritarianism... He must be eloquent on issues like rich-poor divide, oppression of the marginalised, issues pertaining to supression of fundamental rights and he must advocate free speech even to the extent of touching the frontiers of defamation - These are the identification marks of an 'independent judge'," Justice Gogoi said, adding that if a judge is not found conforming to these expectations, his independence is questioned and attacked.
"If the judge doesn't do it, 'attack the judge' - not criticise the judgment. This is destructive of the independence of the judiciary," he said.
Justice Gogoi allotted seat 131 in RS: Opposition walks out in protest
On
the
question
as
to
why
the
Ayodhya
judgement
was
bereft
of
the
name
of
its
author,
Justice
Gogoi
said
why
must
a
judgment
of
Supreme
Court
have
the
name
of
its
author?
"I
can
show
32
cases
decided
by
a
particular
bench
in
2015-16
when
author
wasn't
named
in
the
judgment.
But
then
no
questions
were
asked.
Speaking
for
myself,
I
have
myself
been
author
of
13
judgments
when
author
wasn't
mentioned,"
Justice
Gogoi
said.
He
highlighted
on
the
need
to
boost
the
scheme
for
immunity
to
judges
and
said
the
in-house
enquiry
does
not
contemplate
the
participation
of
lawyers,
witnesses,
cross
examination
and
it
does
not
contemplate
participation
of
outsiders.
"There are numerous complaints being made, all of which cannot be entertained. If they are serious, they are taken up. In such cases, the in-house procedure/inquiry is available online," he said.
Justice Gogoi said if any complaint against a particular judge is serious enough, it is placed before the Chief Justice of India.
"You don't drive a judge through an enquiry straightway... Judges won't be able to function," he said.
Justice Gogoi also expressed concern that young members of the bar were not keen to be judges.
"The office of the judge of a high court has been made so vulnerable that a lawyer is happy to continue as a lawyer. Don't forget the sacrifice a lawyer makes to become a judge," he said.
Justice Gogoi expressed satisfaction with the Collegium system and said that some amount of discipline may improve it further.
"The Collegium is an excellent system. It has worked well. It has stood the test of time. Some amount of discipline may make it work better. Some may not be satisfied but the idea is to be true to the law...
"The problem is with individuals running the system. The problem may not necessarily be from Collegium members, but from outside the Collegium but within the judicial fraternity," the former CJI said.