Interviews by judges

The Supreme Court has rightly and resolutely observed that judges have no business granting interviews on pending matters. A Bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud has taken a serious note of an interview given by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay to a news channel about the West Bengal teachers’ recruitment scam. In the interview, the Calcutta High Court judge reportedly made remarks about the Trinamool Congress government and party leader Abhishek Banerjee, who is on the radar of Central probe agencies that are investigating the scam. Reacting sharply to Banerjee’s accusation that some persons in the judicial system were working in league with the BJP, Justice Gangopadhyay had allegedly threatened that if such comments were made against him, he would ‘show how tough the judiciary can be.’

Advertisement

The apex court has drawn a line that should not be crossed by any judge. This is a reaffirmation of the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life, as adopted by a full court meeting of the Supreme Court in May 1997. This veritable code of ethics states that ‘a judge is expected to let his judgments speak for themselves’ and ‘he shall not give interviews to the media.’ It also asserts that ‘a judge shall not enter into a public debate or express his views in public on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to arise for judicial determination.’ No wonder Justice Gangopadhyay finds himself under judicial scrutiny for violating these crystal-clear guidelines.

The people’s faith in the judiciary is undermined whenever any judge is perceived to be partisan. It is imperative for judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts to lead by example so that the credibility of the entire judicial system is not compromised. Keeping one’s distance both from the powers that be and the Opposition parties is a prerequisite for maintaining the dignity of a judge’s august office. The recent farewell party hosted by the Kerala Chief Minister for the outgoing High Court Chief Justice has needlessly triggered a controversy over the impartiality of the judiciary, as envisaged in the Constitution. It is hoped that the apex court’s tough stand will deter judges from lowering the bar.