The bar bench balance

The Indian judicial system, perhaps like many others, is going through a state of flux. When the Executive spoke about revising the process of how judges are to be appointed to the constitutional courts, people within the judiciary reacted with typical cynicism and predictable suspicion. And not without cause.

There have been instances in the past when nebulous attempts to infringe on its independence have come a cropper thanks to the largely in house alacrity. The Siddhartha Shankar Rays and the Gokhales were left red in the face. This is not to suggest that the system is perfect and needs no correction. Far from it. The cleavage between the original intent and contemporary content is showing!!!

Larger issues apart, at the functional level, the High court has its little challenges at the operational level. Many of the day to day operational calls are taken by the Chief Justice and his body of advisors who are senior district judges and are posted as registrars. As the ‘master of the rolls’ he distributes the work load and sets the agenda.

He defines the road ahead. He is an untrained leader and yet so much depends on his leadership qualities. I remember about three decades ago it was a near presumption by the Bar that the Chief would change the rolls once in about six weeks. Later learned CJs have seen vision in the opposing paradigm. In recent times chiefs have advisedly refused to indulge in the task for a whole session. To each his own take.

Sublime wisdom is assumed and that is a dangerous thought! I always believe that self-doubt is a fine insurance against mistakes. The modest head that bend a tad does not miss what he is trampling upon. Yet another sign post: The judiciary belongs to the Bench and the Bar. It is good management to take along with you its primary players. To impose it runs the risk of half-hearted implementation.

The Bar is part that has an interest in the working of the system and must therefore by implication have a say in its functioning. In more recent times, the Bar and the bench dictated by historic happenings and political hues have taken adversarial stances. To build bridges and to consult the Bar in the larger decision making processes is vital and can be a sensitive manner of going ahead.

To administer is not always to rule. To carry the bar alongside, to understand that they are stakeholders in the administration of justice is critical to the road ahead. It adds more legitimacy and purpose to the exercise. Lawyers too must admit that convenience is a poor test to social roles. The judicial system is not designed for their comfort or for their prosperity. It is incidental to the system. Lawyers must come to understand that freedom brings with it responsibility.

The capacity to overcome personal interests- regional political economic are the traits that give them social status. The hidden price tag is the responsibility. Lawyers over the years have built for themselves some not very flattering images in public mind. Not without cause. They too would do well to realise that the power to be heard in the decision making process is earned, not gifted.

Man of calibre and integrity must be promoted to primordial places and then alone will the hygiene of the system improve. A new leader is always a signal of hope. In the instant case he starts with the advantage of comparison. Fromm here we hope he earns his credits on performance.

The system has shown a clear sense of vertical reverence. It suits the giver, it pleases the recipient. This must change- change for the good of both. It would do both more justice. We must set our house in order. We live in glass houses. The aquarium is under watch.

By:L Ravichander