Relative of the judge (INDIA) The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill introduced in Parliament bars immediate family and close relatives of judges from practising in their court. Section 3 (2)(c) of the Bill states: “No judge shall permit any member of his immediate family (including spouse, son, daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law or any other close relative) who is a member of the bar, to appear before him or be associated in any manner with a cause to be dealt with by him.” Section 3(2)(d) asks the judge not to permit any member of his family who is a member of the Bar to use the residence in which he resides or use other facilities provided to the judge for professional work of such member; and Section 3(2)(e) bars the judge from hearing and deciding a matter in which a member of his family, or his close relative or a friend, is concerned. The Bill explains that the term “relative of the judge” includes his or her spouse, brother or sister, brother or sister of the spouse (and the spouse of that brother or sister), brother or sister of either of the parents of the judge, any lineal ascendant or descendant of the judge or the spouse of the judge (and the spouse of that person). The Bill draws its sustenance from the Law Commissions 230th Report, presented to the government in 2009. The commission said in this report: “If a person has practised in a High Court, say, for 20-25 years and is appointed a judge in the same High Court, overnight change is not possible. He has his colleague advocates – both senior and junior – as well as his kith and kin, who had been practising with him. Even wards of some district judges, elevated to a High Court, are in practice in the same High Court. There are occasions when advocate judges either settle their scores with the advocates who have practised with them, or have soft corner for them. In any case, this affects their impartiality, and justice is the loser. The equity demands that justice shall not only be done but should also appear to have been done. Judges, whose kith and kin are practising in a High Court, should not be posted in the same High Court. This will eliminate ‘uncle judges.” The commission added: “Sometimes it appears that this high office is patronised. A person, whose near relation or well-wisher is or had been a judge in the higher courts or is a senior advocate or is a political high-up, stands a better chance of elevation. It is not necessary that such a person must be competent because sometimes even less competent persons are inducted. There is no dearth of such examples. Such persons should not be appointed and at least in the same High Court. If they are posted in other High Courts, it will test their calibre and eminence in the legal field.” The rot in the higher judiciary seems to be much deeper than what has surfaced.
Posted on: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:52:43 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015