Supreme Court Decision on Judges' Asset Declaration

In a landmark decision taken on April 1, all judges of the Supreme Court, including the Chief Justice of India, have committed to publicly declaring their assets. This decision follows the discovery of a large sum of currency at the residence of Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma. Unlike government officials and politicians, judges are not legally required to make such information public, and many have not done so. This move signifies a potential shift in judicial transparency and accountability.

Restatement of Values of Judicial Life

The judiciary’s decision aligns with the 1997 Restatement of Values of Judicial Life, a code of ethics adopted to guide judges in their conduct. This framework emphasizes institutional accountability, requiring judges to declare their assets and investments to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and establish an in-house procedure for inquiries into judges’ alleged misconduct or corruption.

Key Values and Guidelines

• Judges should avoid actions that erode public faith in the judiciary, ensuring justice is both done and seen to be done.
• Judges must refrain from political activities and holding office in various organizations.
• Avoid close associations with individual members of the Bar; family members who are part of the Bar should not appear before the judge.
• Maintain impartiality through a degree of aloofness and avoid involvement in cases with personal connections.
• Abstain from expressing views on political matters subject to judicial review.
• Avoid media interviews and let judgments speak for themselves.
• Accept no gifts or hospitality beyond family and friends.
• Disclose any shares or investments in involved companies before presiding over relevant cases.
• Avoid speculation in shares or engaging in business activities.
• Refrain from seeking financial benefits linked to judicial office unless clearly permissible.
• Remain aware of being under public scrutiny and avoid conduct unbecoming of high office.

In-House Procedure and Accountability

In response to the values outlined, a full court resolved to establish an in-house procedure to address judges who do not adhere to these universally accepted values. A five-member committee formalized this procedure in 1999, mandating judges to confidentially declare all assets to the CJI. Although initially confidential, the stance on public asset disclosure has evolved, allowing for voluntary public declarations.

Recent Invocations and Examples

The resolution and in-house procedures were invoked in recent cases, such as an inquiry against Justice Yashwant Varma and a sexual harassment complaint against a High Court judge. These measures provide an alternative accountability mechanism to impeachment, addressing ‘bad conduct’ inconsistent with judicial office but not constituting provable misconduct.