🐾
Judicial Accountability
Standards, Transparency, Complaints & The Mechanics of Removal
PART I — ETHICS & TRANSPARENCY
THE 1999 CHARTER
Restatement of Values
- Judicial independence requires judicial accountability. In 1999, the Supreme Court adopted the **Restatement of Values of Judicial Life**.
- **Key Tenets:** A judge should be aloof from political/controversial debates, not give interviews to media on pending cases, and not hear matters involving family members.
- *Constraint:* This is a moral code and lacks statutory backing, meaning it relies heavily on self-regulation.
THE 2019 JUDGMENT
Judiciary under RTI
- For years, the Judiciary resisted coming under the Right to Information (RTI) Act to protect judicial independence.
- **Landmark Shift (2019):** A Constitution Bench ruled that the **office of the Chief Justice of India is a "Public Authority"** under the RTI Act.
- Transparency and Independence are "two sides of the same coin." Information like judges' assets is disclosable, but the RTI must not be used as a tool of surveillance.
PART II — DISCIPLINE & SANCTION
INTERNAL OVERSIGHT
In-House Complaints Mechanism
- How do you complain against a sitting judge? The Judiciary developed an **In-House Procedure (1999)**.
- Complaints against High Court judges go to the Chief Justice of that HC. Complaints against HC Chief Justices or SC judges go to the **CJI**.
- If the CJI finds the complaint serious, a peer committee of judges investigates. If guilty, the judge may be asked to resign; if they refuse, the CJI can withdraw judicial work and advise Parliament to initiate removal.
ARTICLE 124(4)
The Removal Process
- Regulated by the **Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968**. Removal requires a motion signed by 100 Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members.
- If admitted by the Speaker/Chairman, a 3-member inquiry committee is formed (SC Judge, HC Chief Justice, Eminent Jurist).
- If the committee finds the judge guilty of **proved misbehaviour or incapacity**, Parliament must pass the motion by a **Special Majority** in both houses.
- *Result:* It is an exceedingly difficult process by design; no SC judge has ever been removed via this route.