💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: Executive & Judiciary

  • Addressing claims of backwardness by various politically powerful castes

    Context

    Two rulings of the Supreme Court have frayed nerves in Maharashtra on the broader question of “reservation”. The other pertains to OBC reservation in local bodies. Both issues have relevance beyond Maharashtra.

    Challenges in addressing the demand for reservation

    • Lack of quantitative data: The issue of actual numbers or population share of OBCs has been talked about for over a decade.
    • Besides, there is a need to understand the socio-economic situation of different backward communities.
    • In the last instance, we have to decide which groups are backward and what needs to be done for them.
    • The political class have consistently avoided the juridical reality.

    Consensus between judiciary and political class

    • That consensus after implementation of Mandal commission recommendation had three dimensions:
    • 1) Accepting that caste is the main cause of tradition-born backwardness among a large section of the population.
    • 2) Resorting to “reservation” as the easiest policy response.
    • 3) Recognising and accommodating the political aspirations of the backward sections by expanding the social base of the political elite.
    • But this resulted in the current deadlock on the question of social justice.
    • Today, not only the Marathas, but Jats and Patidars, too, claim that vast numbers among them have been left behind in the contemporary economy.
    • These demands have deflected attention from two matters.
    • 1) That the enabling provision of the Constitution aims at social backwardness (caused by societal location).
    • 2) That the causes of economic distress originating in development policies are distinct from backwardness primarily originating in caste location.
    • Granting reservations on an economic basis seems to have complicated matters.

    Five reservation-related issues gaining renewed urgency

    • Intra-OBC differentiations: This issue was already raised by a member of the Mandal Commission itself.
    • Most states have failed to come up with an effective arrangement to addressing the issue.
    • The Centre is currently waiting for a report on this question.
    • Intra-caste stratification: Intra-caste stratification is increasing — something that was rather limited at the time of Mandal.
    • What sociologist D L Sheth called as classification is now becoming the central issue, with many complications.
    • Advantages and logic: The third question is about the specific advantages and logic of reservation in the three different arenas of employment, education and political representation.
    • Limits of reservation: There is need to discuss the limits of reservation and the need to think of additional measures to augment the policy of social justice.
    • Setting boundaries: With such widespread poverty and suffering, how do we distinguish between backwardness primarily caused by a group’s social location in traditional social order and backwardness resulting from distortions of the political economy?
    • Unless we grapple with this question, reservation is bound to remain a contentious issue.

    Way forward

    • The above questions are best left ideally to a third backward classes commission whose time has come.
    • Removing the 50 per cent cap legislatively needs to be considered.

    Conclusion

    We need to devise a mechanism to verify the claims of backwardness to address the increasing demands for reservation from the politically strong section of society.

  • [pib] Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary

    The Union Cabinet has approved the continuation of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for the Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary. It also approved the decision to support the Gram Nyayalayas by proving recurring and non-recurring grants for a period of 5 years with a total outlay of Rs 50 crores.

    About the Scheme

    • A Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary has been in operation since 1993-94.
    • Adequacy of judicial infrastructure is critical for the reduction of pendency and backlog of cases in Courts.
    • The primary responsibility of infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary rests with the State Governments.
    • The present proposal provides for additional activities like the construction of lawyer halls, toilets complexes and digital computer rooms.
    • This will add to the convenience of lawyers and litigants besides reducing the digital divide.

    Why such a move?

    • Adequacy of judicial infrastructure is critical for the reduction of pendency and backlog of cases in Courts.
    • Several courts are still functioning in rented premises with insufficient space and some in dilapidated conditions without basic amenities.
    • Well-equipped judicial infrastructure facilitates the administration of justice in a manner that allows easy access and timely delivery of justice to all.

    What is Gram Nyayalayas Scheme?

    • Gram Nyayalayas were established for speedy and easy access to the justice system in the rural areas across the country.
    • The Gram Nyayalayas Act came into force on October 2, 2009.
    • In terms of Section 3(1) of the Act, it is for the State Governments to establish Gram Nyayalayas in consultation with the respective High Courts.
    • The Act authorizes Gram Nyayalaya to hold a mobile court outside its headquarters.
    • Some major reasons behind the non-enforcement include financial constraints, the reluctance of lawyers, police and other government officials.

    Features of the Gram Nyayalayas

    • Gram Nyayalaya is established generally at headquarter of every Panchayat at the intermediate level or a group of contiguous panchayat in a district where there is no panchayat at an intermediate level.
    • The Gram Nyayalayas are presided over by a Nyayadhikari, who will have the same power, enjoy the same salary and benefits of a Judicial Magistrate of First Class.
    • Such Nyayadhikari is to be appointed by the State Government in consultation with the respective High Court.

    Jurisdiction

    • A Gram Nyayalaya have jurisdiction over an area specified by a notification by the State Government in consultation with the respective High Court.
    • The Court can function as a mobile court at any place within the jurisdiction of such Gram Nyayalaya, after giving wide publicity to that regard.
    • The Gram Nyayalayas have both civil and criminal jurisdiction over the offences and nature of suits specified in the First, Second and Third schedule of the Act.
    • The pecuniary jurisdiction of the Nyayalayas are fixed by the respective High Courts.
    • Appeals in criminal matter can be made to the Sessions Court in the respective jurisdiction and in civil matters to the District Court within a period of one month from the date of judgment.

    Trials

    • Gram Nyayalayas can follow special procedures in civil matters, in a manner it deem just and reasonable in the interest of justice.
    • Civil suits are proceeded on a day-to-day basis, with limited adjournments and are to be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of institution of the suit.
    • In execution of a decree, the Court can allow special procedures following rules of natural justice.
    • Gram Nyayalayas allow for conciliation of the dispute and settlement of the same in the first instance.
    • They have been given the power to accept certain evidence which would otherwise not be acceptable under the Indian Evidence Act.

  • Collegium system’s role in protecting democracy

    Context

    Judiciary is being challenged, from within and outside. It must shield itself from further erosion of its independence and competence by scrupulously following the law, as declared by the Supreme Court (SC) itself.

    How the Collegium helped to secure the independence of judiciary

    • In 1993, the SC held the following:
    • The process of appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts is an integrated ‘participatory consultative process’.
    • The process aims at selecting the best and most suitable persons available for appointment.
    • The Collegium consists of the CJI and the four senior-most judges of the SC and high courts.
    • It was devised to ensure that the opinion of the Chief Justice of India is not merely his individual opinion, but an opinion formed collectively by a body of men at the apex level in the judiciary.
    • By judicial interpretation, the Supreme Court re-interpreting Article 124 and 214 of the Constitution empowered the judiciary to make appointments to the higher judiciary to secure the rule of law.

    Threat to the judicial independence

    • The framers of the Constitution were alive to the likely erosion of judicial independence.
    • On May 23, 1949, K T Shah stated that the Judiciary, which is the main bulwark of civil liberties, should be completely separate from and independent of the Executive, whether by direct or by indirect influence.
    • In  2016, the Supreme Court struck down a constitutional amendment for creating the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).
    • The SC strongly disapproved of any role for the political executive in the final selection and appointment of judges.
    • The SC said that “reciprocity and feelings of payback to the political executive” would be disastrous to the independence of the judiciary.

    Consider the question “How the Collegium system helped the Judiciary secure its independence? What are the issues with it?”

    Conclusion

    The selection of deserving judges is essential to ensure the independence of the judiciary. The Collegium must do its best in this task.

    Back2Basics: About the National Judicial Appointments Commission

    • The NJAC or National Judicial Appointments Commission sought to change the system, where judges would have been appointed by a commission where the legislative and the executive would have had a role.
    • The NJAC was supposed to comprise of the Chief Justice of India (Chairperson, ex-officio), two other senior judges of the Supreme Court, The Union Minister of Law and Justice, ex-officio and two eminent persons, to be appointed by the Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister of India, and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
    • The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 13 August 2014 and by the Rajya Sabha on 14 August 2014, and became an Act.
    • The NJAC replaced the collegium system for the appointment of judges.
    • The NJAC Bill and the Constitutional Amendment Bill, was ratified by 16 of the state legislatures in India, and the President gave his assent on 31 December 2014.
    • The NJAC Act became effective from April 13, 2015.
    • The NJAC enjoyed support from the Supreme Court Bar Association and many legal luminaries but was also challenged by some lawyer associations and groups before the Supreme Court of India through Writ Petitions.
    • A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court referred the matter to a Constitution Bench that heard different arguments for over a month.
    •  Finally, on October 16, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court declared the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act and the NJAC Act 2014 “unconstitutional and void”.

  • What is Tele-Law Scheme?

    The Law Ministry recently commemorated an event to mark the coverage of more than nine lakh beneficiaries of the government’s tele-law scheme, using common service centres (CSCs) to provide justice across the country.

    Tele-Law Scheme

    • The concept of Tele-Law is to facilitate the delivery of legal advice through a panel of lawyers stationed at the State Legal Services Authorities (SALSA) and CSC.
    • Tele-Law means the use of communications and information technology for the delivery of legal information and advice.
    • The project initiates to connect citizens with lawyers through video conferencing facilities by the Para-Legal Volunteers stationed at identified 50,000 CSCs.
    • This e-interaction between lawyers and people would be through the video-conferencing infrastructure available at the CSCs.

    Features of the program

    • Under this programme, smart technology of video conferencing, telephone/instant calling facilities available at the vast network of CSC.
    • It enables anyone to seek legal advice without wasting precious time and money.
    • The service is free for those who are eligible for free legal Aid as mentioned under Section 12 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987.
    • For all others, a nominal fee is charged.

    Back2Basics: Free legal aid in India

    • Article 21 of the Constitution of India states, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”.
    • Hence ensuring legal aid to everyone is necessary for ensuring substantive equality.
    • Article 39A of the Constitution of India provides for free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of the society, to promote justice on the basis of equal opportunity.
    • Articles 14 and 22(1) also make it obligatory for the State to ensure equality before the law and a legal system that promotes justice on a basis of equal opportunity to all.

  • Issues with the UAPA and role of judiciary

    Context

    Father Stan Swamy passed away at a private hospital in Mumbai on July 5. Fr. Swamy was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

    How Supreme Court judgment leaves the scope for misuse of UAPA

    • The Supreme Court’s April 2019 decision in National Investigation Agency vs Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali on the interpretation of the UAPA has affected all downstream decisions involving the statute.
    • This decision has created a new doctrine.
    • According to the decision, in considering bail applications under the UAPA, courts must presume every allegation made in the First Information Report to be correct.
    • Further, bail can now be obtained only if the accused produces material to contradict the prosecution.
    • In other words, the burden rests on the accused to disprove the allegations, which is virtually impossible in most cases.
    • The decision has essentially excluded the admissibility of evidence at the stage of bail.
    • By doing so, it has effectively excluded the Evidence Act itself, which arguably makes the decision unconstitutional.
    • Due to the Supreme Court judgment, High Courts have their hands tied, and must perforce refuse bail, as disproving the case is virtually impossible.
    • The Delhi High Court recently granted bail to three young activists arrested under UAPA in a conspiracy relating to the 2020 riots in Delhi.
    • The Supreme Court reportedly expressed surprise and gave the direction that the decision will “not to be treated as precedent by any court” to give similar reliefs.

    Misuse of the UAPA

    • With such high barriers of proof, it is now impossible for an accused to obtain bail, and is in fact a convenient tool to put a person behind bars indefinitely.
    • This is being abused by the government, police and prosecution liberally: now, all dissenters are routinely implicated under charges of sedition or criminal conspiracy and under the UAPA.
    •  In multiple instances, evidence is untenable, sometimes even arguably planted, and generally weak overall.
    • But as a consequence of UAPA being applied, the accused cannot even get bail.

    Way forward

    • If we want to prevent the misuse, the decision in the Watali case must be urgently reversed or diluted, otherwise, we run the risk of personal liberties being compromised very easily.

    Conclusion

    The provision of the act leaves the scope for misuse and therefore judiciary and legislature need to take steps to provide safeguards to prevent the misuse.

  • How the GNCTD (Amendment) Act affects functioning of Delhi Assembly

    The article highlights the implications of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD)(Amendment) Act, 2021 on functioning of Assembly and its committees.

    Context

    The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD)(Amendment) Act, 2021 has been criticised as a retrograde law. However, what deserves equal attention is the Act’s assault on the functioning of Delhi’s Legislative Assembly.

    Background of GNCTD Act

    • The GNCTD Act was enacted in 1992.
    • Under the Act, Delhi Legislative Assembly was given the power to regulate its own procedure, as well as the conduct of its business.
    • This sought to realise a delicate balance reflecting Delhi’s unique constitutional position: neither full state nor a centrally governed Union Territory.

    How amendment affects functioning of Assembly

    • Its standards of procedure and conduct of business have been firmly tethered to that of the Lok Sabha, depriving Delhi’s elected MLAs of an effective say in how their Assembly should be run.
    • The Amending Act prohibits the Assembly from making any rule enabling either itself or its committees to consider any issue concerned with “the day-to-day administration of the capital” or “conduct inquiries in relation to administrative decisions”.
    • The most significant impact of this shall be on the exercise of free speech in the Assembly and its committees.
    • The amendment impeded the Assembly from performing its most basic legislative function — that of holding the executive to account by restricting its ability to freely discuss matters happening in the capital.

    Impact on committees

    • The deliberations and inputs of committees often pave the way for intelligent legislative action.
    • In a way, they act as the eyes and ears for the whole House, which has neither the time nor the expertise to scrutinise issues in depth.
    • It would be impossible for committees to perform this function without the power to conduct inquiries.
    • Pre-emptively injunct a committee from conducting an inquiry “in relation to the administrative decisions” (an extremely broad exception) completely negates the ability of committees to function effectively as the Assembly’s advisors and agents.
    • The quality of legislative work emanating from the Assembly is thus ultimately bound to suffer.

    Consider the question “What are the reasons for frequent disputes between Delhi government and the Lt. Governor? Would the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD)(Amendment) Act, 2021 succeed in ending that trend?” 

    Conclusion

    The amendment deprive the Delhi Assmbly of its very basic functions and render it a ‘legislature’ in name only. Surely, Delhi’s voters deserve better than that. The Government need to reconsider the provisions of the amendment act.

  • Rule of Law vs Rule by Law

    What makes the Rule of Law different from the Rule by Law? It is the idea of justice and equity that separates the two. The article explains the principles that emerge as the basis of the Rule of law and the role of the judiciary in ensuring their constitutionality.

    Understanding law

    • Law, in its most general sense, is a tool of social control that is backed by the sovereign.
    • However, such a definition of law can be used not only to render justice, it can also be used to justify oppression.
    • Therefore it is argued that a law cannot really be classified as a “law” unless it imbibes within itself the ideals of justice and equity.
    • So, any law backed by a sovereign must be tempered by certain ideals or tenets of justice.
    • Only a state that is governed by such law, can be said to have the Rule of Law.
    • The British colonial power used the law as a tool of political repression, enforcing it unequally on the parties, with a different set of rules for the British and for the Indians.
    •  It was an enterprise famous for “Rule by Law”, rather than “Rule of Law.

    Four principles of rule of law

    • Clarity and accessibility: Laws must be clear and accessible, the people at least ought to know what the laws are.
    • Another implication of this principle is that they should be worded in simple, unambiguous language.
    • Equality: An important aspect of equality before law is having equal access to justice.
    • This guarantee of equal justice will be rendered meaningless if the vulnerable sections are unable to enjoy their rights because of their poverty or illiteracy or any other kind of weakness.
    • Another aspect is the issue of “gender equality”.
    • Participation of people: The third principle, the “right to participate in the creation and refinement of laws”.
    • The very essence of a democracy is that its citizenry has a role to play, directly or indirectly, in the laws that govern them.
    • In India, it is done through elections.
    • The idea that people are the ultimate sovereign is also to be found in notions of human dignity and autonomy
    • Strong independent judiciary: The fourth principle stemsp from the idea that the judiciary is the “guardian” of the Constitution.
    • The judiciary is the primary organ which is tasked with ensuring that the laws that are enacted are in line with the Constitution.

    Independent judiciary and role of media

    • The judiciary cannot be controlled, directly or indirectly, by the legislature or the executive, or else the Rule of Law would become illusory.
    • At the same time, judges should not be swayed by the emotional pitch of public opinion either, which is getting amplified through social media platforms.
    • Judges have to be mindful of the fact that the noise thus amplified is not necessarily reflective of what is right and what the majority believes in.
    • Therefore, media trials cannot be a guiding factor in deciding cases.
    • It is, therefore, extremely vital to function independently and withstand all external aids and pressures.
    • While there is a lot of discussion about the pressure from the executive, it is also imperative to start a discourse as to how social media trends can affect the institutions.

    Conclusion

    The importance of the judiciary shouldn’t blind us to the fact that the responsibility of safeguarding constitutionalism lies not just with the courts. All the three organs of the state, i.e., the executive, legislature and the judiciary, are equal repositories of constitutional trust.

  • Taking note of the Delhi High Court’s judgment on ‘defining terrorism’

    The recent Delhi High Court order granting bail to the student activists charged with the UAPA has brought into focus the issue of misuse of anti-terror laws by the policy. The article deals with this issue.

    Misuse of anti-terror laws

    • In the period 2015-2019, as many as 7,840 persons were arrested under the UAPA (Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act) 1967 but only 155 were convicted by the trial courts.
    • Under TADA, till 1994, though 67,000 people were detained, just 725 were convicted in spite of confessions made to police officers being made admissible.
    • In Kartar Singh (1994), the Supreme Court of India had observed that in many cases, the prosecution had unjustifiably invoked provisions of TADA.
    • It added that such an invocation of TADA was ‘nothing but the sheer misuse and abuse of the Act by the police’.

     The definition of terrorism

    • There is no universal definition of the term ‘terrorism’ either in India or at the international level.
    •  Accordingly, neither TADA nor UAPA has a definition of the crucial terms ‘terror’ and ‘terrorism’.
    • Section 15 of UAPA merely defines a terrorist act in extremely wide and vague words: ‘as any act with intent to threaten or likely to threaten the unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty of India or with intent to strike terror or likely to strike terror in the people….’.
    • In Yaqoob Abdul Razzak Memon (2013), the Supreme Court said that terrorist acts can range from threats to actual assassinations, kidnappings, airline hijacking, car bombs, explosions, mailing of dangerous materials, use of chemical, biological, nuclear weapons etc.
    • In Hitendra Vishnu Thakur (1994), the Supreme Court had defined terrorism as the ‘use of violence when its most important result is not merely the physical and mental damage of the victim but the prolonged psychological effect it produces … on the society as a whole’.
    • In Kartar Singh (1994), the Supreme Court held that a mere disturbance of public order that disturbs even the tempo of the life of community of any particular locality is not a terrorist act.
    • By this interpretation, the CAA protests in a few localities of Delhi cannot be termed as terrorist activity.
    • In the PUCL judgment (2003), the Supreme Court included within its meaning amongst other things the ‘razing of constitutional principles that we hold dear’, ‘tearing apart of the secular fabric’ and ‘promotion of prejudice and bigotry.
    • Accordingly, in the CAA protest case the Delhi High Court concluded that since the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in UAPA is wide and somewhat vague, it cannot be casually applied to ordinary conventional crimes.
    • The Delhi High Court said that the act of the accused must reflect the essential character of terrorism.

    Distinction between ‘law and order’, ‘public order’ and ‘security of state’

    • In Ram Manohar Lohia (1966), the Supreme Court explained the distinction between the above three terms.
    • Law and order represents the largest circle within which is the next circle representing ‘public order’, and the smallest circle represents the ‘security of state’.
    • Accordingly, an act may affect ‘law and order’ but not ‘public order’.
    • Similarly, an act may adversely affect ‘public order’ but not the ‘security of state.’
    • In most UAPA cases, the police have failed to understand these distinctions and unnecessarily clamped UAPA charges for simple violations of law and order.

    Conclusion

    Radicalisation generally succeeds only with those who have been subjected to real or perceived injustices. Let us remove injustice to combat terrorism. The creation of a truly just, egalitarian and non-oppressive society would be far more effective in combating terrorism.

  • Testing the constitutionality of section 124A of IPC

    The article highlights the issues with section 124A of the Indian Penal Code and suggests a review of its constitutionality in Kedar Nath judgement by a larger bench.

    About section 124A of IPC

    • Section 124A of the IPC contains the law of sedition.
    • This law was enacted by the British colonial government in 1870 with the sole object of suppressing all voices of Indians critical of the government.
    • The gist of the offence is: bringing or attempting to bring the government into contempt or hatred, or exciting or attempting to excite disaffection towards the government.
    • It categorises four ways sources of seditious acts: spoken words, written words, signs or visible representations.
    • There are three explanations attached to this section.
    • The first explanation says that ‘disaffection’ includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity.
    • The second and third explanations say that one can comment on the measures of the government without bringing or attempting to bring it into contempt or hatred or exciting or attempting to excite disaffection towards the government.

    What did Supreme Court say in Kedar Nath case (1962)

    • In the ultimate analysis, the judgment in Kedar Nath which read down Section 124A and held that without incitement to violence or rebellion there is no sedition.
    •  It says that ‘only when the words written or spoken etc. which have the pernicious tendency or intention of creating public disorder’ the law steps in.
    • So if a policeman thinks that a cartoon has the pernicious tendency to create public disorder, he will arrest that cartoonist.
    • The Kedar Nath judgment makes it possible for the law enforcement machinery to easily take away the fundamental right of citizens.

    Violation of Article 19

    • Sedition, as defined in Section 124A of the IPC, clearly violates Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution which confers the Fundamental Right of freedom of speech and expression.
    • Further, this section does not get protection under Article 19(2) on the ground of reasonable restriction.
    • However, the Supreme Court invoked the words ‘in the interest … of public order’ used in Article 19(2) and held that the offence of sedition arises when seditious utterances can lead to disorder or violence.
    • This act of reading down Section 124A brought it clearly under Article 19(2) and saved the law of sedition from being declared unconstitutional.

    Consider the question “What are the issues with section 124A of Indian Penal Code? Examine the interplay between Article 19 and section 124 of IPC.”

    Conclusion

    People will display disaffection towards a government which has failed them. The law of sedition which penalises them for hating a government which does not serve them cannot exist because it violates Article 19(1)(a) and is not protected by Article 19(2). Therefore, an urgent review of the Kedar Nath judgement by a larger Bench has become necessary.

  • What is Recusal of Judges?

    In the last week, two Supreme Court judges have recused themselves from hearing cases relating to West Bengal.

    Can you list down some basic principles of judicial conduct?

    Independence, Impartiality, Integrity, Propriety, Competence and diligence and Equality are some of them as listed under the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.

    What is the Recusal of Judges?

    • Recusal is the removal of oneself as a judge or policymaker in a particular matter, especially because of a conflict of interest.
    • Recusal usually takes place when a judge has a conflict of interest or has a prior association with the parties in the case.
    • For example, if the case pertains to a company in which the judge holds stakes, the apprehension would seem reasonable.
    • Similarly, if the judge has, in the past, appeared for one of the parties involved in a case, the call for recusal may seem right.
    • A recusal inevitably leads to delay. The case goes back to the Chief Justice, who has to constitute a fresh Bench.

    Rules on Recusals

    • There are no written rules on the recusal of judges from hearing cases listed before them in constitutional courts. It is left to the discretion of a judge.
    • The reasons for recusal are not disclosed in an order of the court. Some judges orally convey to the lawyers involved in the case their reasons for recusal, many do not. Some explain the reasons in their order.
    • The decision rests on the conscience of the judge. At times, parties involved raise apprehensions about a possible conflict of interest.

    Issues with recusal

    • Recusal is also regarded as the abdication of duty. Maintaining institutional civilities are distinct from the fiercely independent role of the judge as an adjudicator.
    • In his separate opinion in the NJAC judgment in 2015, Justice Kurian Joseph highlighted the need for judges to give reasons for recusal as a measure to build transparency.
    • It is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one’s oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case.