The Editor
The Times of India
Mumbai

Sub: Courts should be transparent too.

Sir,

Reference: “RTI in force; courts yet to keep pace” (TOI Nov. 2). It is highly improper of the High Court of Bombay not to have appointed a PIO as yet. The HC registrar should not mull over the kind of information that should be given since there is lot of scope for demanding information from HC and SC. For instance a petitioner may want to question the CJ’s office on the action taken on a letter petition and whether any directions were issued or comments made on it, or was it junked? I have sent letter-petitions to the PIL cell of the SC reporting violation of fundamental rights. But the PIL cell, meant specially for the purpose of looking into letter petitions, has not even acknowledged them.

One can also examine the leave records of the judges to know whether some of them take leave frequently and the total number of days in a year that the judges were present, or to know how many complaints against High Court judges were received in a year, the nature of the complaints and whether disciplinary measures or notices were issued to the judges. Likewise, RTI can be used for demanding information from the Special Investigation Department (SID) of the Bombay HC about the conduct of judges from the lower judiciary, as corruption in the judiciary is growing out of bounds.

As per the Code of Conduct for Judges (Restatement of Values of Judicial Life), adopted in the Conference of Chief Justices of all the High Courts, Judges passed a resolution to declare their assets in the form of real estate or investment within a reasonable time of assuming office. RTI Act can be used by citizens to know whether Judges have declared their assets and whether these are in proportion to their sources of income.

The Supreme Court in landmark judgments (ADR v. Union of India - 2002 and PUCL v. Union of India - 2003) has justified citizens’ right to know assets and antecedents of politicians. In PUCL judgment, it emphatically stated that “Exposure to public scrutiny is one of the known means for getting clean and less polluted persons to govern the country.” Using the same principle, citizens have a right to know their judges because the buck of probity stops there. At least corrupt politicians can be defeated at the hustings every five year or earlier, but one arrogant, corrupt judge rules for 25-30 years.

Hence, judiciary should not shirk from the Right to Information Act, thinking itself to be a holy cow. RTI Act should be used to clean the Augean’s stable called the government, Judiciary being the most important pillar!

Yours powerfully,

RONALD L. REBELLO

Address: 28 Sunrise (552), Samta Nagar,
Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400 101

Tel: (022) 2887241
Cell: 9869 650 870

Email:  yoursfrankly@rediffmail.com

Copy to :
1.. The Chief Justice, Bombay High Court
2.. Advocate General, Bombay High Court

3.. The Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
4.. Attorney General of India, New Delhi.

5.. Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression,
in the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

6.. Law and Social Science students.
7.. Conscious Citizens, Activists and Journalists.

8.. National Campaign for People’s Right to Information (NCPRI)