The judiciary must remain open to scrutiny and criticism to maintain public trust in the justice system, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said on Monday.
He opined that fair, informed and constructive criticism of the judiciary is necessary for a constitutional democracy.
"The judiciary as an institution is not and cannot be above scrutiny. Fair, informed and constructive critique of judicial functioning is a legitimate and necessary feature of a vibrant constitutional democracy, contributing to institutional accountability and self-correction," said CJI Kant.
He also said that courts could not claim public confidence while placing themselves beyond examination. He said transparency required institutions to remain willing to face questions and criticism.
"It lies at the heart of transparency itself. For a court cannot seek the confidence of the public by placing itself beyond scrutiny. It must remain willing to be examined, questioned and, where necessary, criticised," added CJI Kant.
He was delivering the keynote address at the 6th Ram Jethmalani Memorial Lecture Series on the theme “Justice Seen To Be Done: Transparency And Public Trust As Pillars Of The Legal System”.
CJI Kant further stressed that reform must be a continuing process, saying no institution could afford to remain static.
“We, without any hesitation, acknowledge that reform must be the rule. No institution can survive and feel proud to be static,” he observed.
At the same time, he cautioned that there were certain institutional and administrative issues that may not be appropriate to address from a public platform.
Additionally, CJI Kant held that public trust was the foundation of judicial authority. Unlike the other branches of government, the judiciary has neither the “power of the purse” nor “the power of the sword”, he said.
"Public trust is not decoration. It is, in fact, the only currency that authority is ever paid in, the only coin the judiciary has ever truly had," observed CJI Kant.
He said such trust could not be taken for granted and had to be earned through the ordinary functioning of courts.
"That trust is not something an institution can earn once and then simply rely on forever. It has to be renewed continuously, and it is shaped far more by the accumulated ordinary experience people have of the system, case by case, than by any single moment of judgment," added CJI Kant.
CJI Kant also linked transparency to the reasoning given by courts for their decisions. He held that public trust was distinct from whether people agreed with a particular outcome.
"A court that announces its verdict but keeps its reasoning to itself has not really been transparent, whatever else it may have done. Public trust, in turn, is not the same thing as public approval, and the difference matters a great deal. A court does not earn trust by being liked or by handing out the outcomes people want," said CJI Kant.
Senior Advocates Harish Salve and Mahesh Jethmalani also spoke at the event.
[Read Live Coverage]