The Indian judicial system has been greatly lauded in recent times for delivering ‘rightful’ justice. The people of India have reposed great faith and confidence in the judiciary, particularly in the issues related to violation of human rights.

In a candid interview with Pratap Patnaik of Deccan Herald, Senior Lawyer, Constitutional Expert and former Attorney General Soli J Sorajee spoke on the state of judiciary in the India Supreme Court at length.

Excerpts:
Deccan Herald: What are the contributions of the judiciary in free India?
Soli J Sorabjee: Barring the period of emergency our country has a good functioning democracy. Recently, the judiciary did a commendable job by transferring the Gujarat riot cases out of the state to Maharashtra for free and fair trial.

DH: What is the role of the media in Indian democracy?
SJS: The free press in the country, despite its excesses and aberration, has enforced accountability of the builders and holders of powers. In my view, these two institutions are hallmarks of any democratic country.

DH: What are your views on corruption in the judiciary?
SJS: I think there might be some corruption at the subordinate level.  The High Courts of the state had been taking notice of it and punishment such as compulsory retirement or dismissal was given. But in the High Courts, corruption if at all, is only in very few cases. Majority of the Judges in the high courts are not corrupt. There are some rotten eggs and you have them in every institution. However, there should not be even one rotten egg in the judiciary. The Apex Court takes such complaints seriously. There may be cases of false charges against some judges. The collegium consisting of the Chief Justice and top few judges go into the complaints and arrive at the truth. Even minor deviations such as Judges coming late, not delivering judgements for months, treating witnesses with rudeness, etc. should also attract  scrutiny.

DH: What is the level of corruption in the Supreme Court?
SJS: This is nonsense. There may be instances of some Judges inclined towards some parties in certain cases. It is but human and happens everywhere. But if you say there is monetary corruption, that is nonsensical. Some counsel are responsible in spreading such canards. No judge can be successfully corrupt without the active collaboration of a lawyer. If it was established, the lawyer should also be thrown out of the profession. No mercy.

DH: What is your opinion on senior lawyers charging very high fees?
SJS: There are rules framed by the Bar council and nobody observes them. Many senior lawyers charge an exhorbitant fee and do not appear when the cases are called up. It would not be a bad thing if lawyers are brought under the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act. This amounts to deficiency of services on the part of the lawyers.

When lawyers run from one court to another and do not render justice to the case they have in hand, they are not in the court when the other side is arguing the case. Because of such lapses,  the cases are called off. In order to prevent this, the number of briefs should be restricted and cases must be distributed among the junior members of the bars. Such issues are to come from the bar.

DH: Has free India fulfilled the dream of its makers?
SJS: One major anguish I have is that Dr B R Ambedkar’s dream of social justice has not been fulfilled. We still have vast disparities in income. Wealth is concentrated in the hands of few. It is a disgrace. This has to be removed for sustaining a meaningful democracy in the country.

DH: What are your comments on judicial activism?
SJS: Chief Justice (retd.) P N Bhagwati, with his great charm and intellect, introduced the Public Interest Litigation(PIL) to empower common man to enforce his fundamental rights. I do not think the court was exceeding the limit of judicial intervention. It might have happened in some cases. But in India, where executive inaction bordering on callousness and lethargy results in violation of human rights of the marginalised section of the society, the Supreme Court has to act and step in. It can not ignore genuine violation of human rights such as children working in hazardous occupations or women being denied their dues when it came to payment of minimum wages.

DH: What according to you should be the mission of the judiciary?
SJS: The judiciary should start taking human sufferings seriously. The court should look into the sufferings of the under-trials who had been languishing in prisons for 10 years, even though the maximum sentence would be less. The judiciary should notice the sufferings of children working in hazardous occupations. Good and respectful NGOs should come forward to the rescue of the underprivileged children. The introduction of PIL is one of the achievements of the judiciary which helped millions of underprivileged and downtrodden people to enforce their fundamental rights.

The judiciary has done a commendable job by enforcing environmental laws to conserve our forests. But for the judiciary, half of our forests would have been inundated and the level of pollution would have been much higher than that we had experienced a decade back.