NAJAR Statement over the Prime Minister’s presence at a private religious event at the Chief Justice of India’s residence

NAJAR: National Alliance for Justice, Accountability & Rights

NAJAR expresses grave concern over the Prime Minister’s presence at a religious event at the CJI’s residence

Independence of Judiciary from Executive must be ensured in all circumstances

13th Sep, 2024: The National Alliance for Justice, Accountability and Rights (NAJAR) expresses grave concern at the recent presence of the Prime Minister, Mr. Narendra Modi at a private religious gathering at the residence of the Chief Justice of India, which was widely publicized by the media. Given the profound faith that millions of ordinary citizens have in the constitutionally sacrosanct position of the Chief Justice, this raises serious questions around judicial integrity and propriety. As legal professionals engaging with the law and the Constitution in our everyday lives, we see this as a deeply troubling event, for it risks blurring the vital lines that separate the Judiciary from the Executive, within our democratic framework.

Our Constitution envisions a clear and unwavering separation between these two branches of government. During the Constituent Assembly debates, one of our country’s foremost constitutional thinkers, K.T. Shah passionately defended this principle arguing, “From the point of view of civil liberty and the general democratic character of the governance of the country, is the complete separation of the Judiciary from the Executive in every way that we can possibly guarantee. I think it is of the utmost importance 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.”

These words are a stark reminder of the Judiciary’s fundamental role as a neutral arbiter, crucial for maintaining public confidence and protecting democratic values. The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life adopted by the Supreme Court in 1997, emphasizes that members of the higher judiciary conduct themselves in a manner that reaffirms people’s faith in the judiciary’s impartiality and avoid any act, whether in official or personal capacity, that erodes perception of this credibility.

This is further reaffirmed by the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002, Principle 2.2 of which provides that a judge’s conduct, both in and out of court, maintain and enhance public confidence in the impartiality of the Judiciary, while Principle 3.2 underscores that justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done. The current situation, however, jeopardizes this confidence by suggesting the potential of an alignment between the Judiciary and the Executive. Such appearances, regardless of intent, can severely erode trust in our justice system. It must also be noted that the Chief Justice himself signed on to the New Delhi Principles last November, which reiterated these very Bangalore Principles.

This is particularly concerning in the current political climate where civil liberties, constitutional values and the very democratic foundation of our country are under threat, and the role of the Supreme Court as the last bastion of fundamental rights and a protector against Executive excesses has become all the more paramount. Over the next few months, the Supreme Court will adjudicate several matters of public importance where the Central Government is a party. In such a time, even unintentional acts that might give rise to doubts about the judiciary’s independence should be avoided, as underlined by Principle 1.3 that a judge must not only be free from inappropriate connections with the Executive but must also appear to be free from such influence to a reasonable observer. This entire episode has the potential of sending damaging signals at various levels of the judiciary, which needs to be independent of the executive at the state and district levels too.

Moreover, the public spectacle that this occasion was allowed to be turned into, raises legitimate questions about the message the Prime Minister wants to convey, especially with Maharashtra Assembly elections less than two months away and a case involving a key opposition party from the state being pending before the Supreme Court.

We hope and trust that the Chief Justice of India - as the highest constitutional guardian of judicial integrity in our country - will reflect deeply on these concerns raised and take decisive steps to reaffirm the Judiciary’s independence. It is imperative to restore and preserve the clear boundary between the Judiciary and the Executive, to uphold the trust and confidence vital to the democratic foundations of our country. Both the Chief Justice of India and the Prime Minister are bound by their constitutional oath, at all times and to We The People.

Endorsed by:

1. SQ Masood (Law Researcher and Activist, Hyderabad, Telangana)

2. Hasi Jain (Law Student, Gurgaon, Haryana)

3. Adv Mubassir (Advocate, Jammu & Kashmir)

4. Adv Pyoli (Advocate, New Delhi)

5. Carina Singh (Law Graduate and Social Activist)

6. Bhargav Oza (Law Student and Labour Researcher, Ahmedabad, Gujarat)

7. Sameer Kagad (Law student, Hubli, Karnataka)

8. Ameya Bokil (Legal Researcher, Bengaluru, Karnataka)

9. Adv Priyanka Chakrabarty (Advocate, Hyderabad, Telangana)

10. Katyayani Chandola (Human Rights Lawyer, New Delhi)

11. Adv Kavin Castro (Advocate, Chennai, Tamil Nadu)

12. Adv Dr Shalu Nigam (Advocate, Delhi NCR)

13. Adv Indira Unninayar (Advocate, Delhi High Court and Supreme Court)

14. Shaikh Faiyaz Alam (Law student, Mumbai, Maharashtra)

15. Priyasha Sinha (Law Student, Hyderabad, Telangana)

16. Adv Mandakini (Advocate, Hyderabad, Telangana)

17. Arundhati Dhuru (NAPM Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh)

18. Adv Pratik Kumar Advocate, Delhi NCR)

19. Maansi Verma (Lawyer, Delhi)

20. Adv Nandini Mitra (Advocate, High Court, Calcutta, West Bengal)

21. Adv Mustafa Haji (Lawyer, Kargil, Ladakh)

22. Adv Rishav Sharma (Legal practitioner, New Delhi)

23. Adv. Iswarya (Advocate, Chennai, Tamil Nadu)

24. Vinay Kumar (Law Student & Social Activist, Bengaluru, Karnataka)

25. Naveen Gautam (Legal Researcher, Trainer, Activist, New Delhi)

26. Meera Sanghamitra (Law Graduate and Social Activist, Hyderabad, Telangana)

Issued by NAJAR: National Alliance for Justice, Accountability & Rights

Write to najarjusticeforum[at]gmail.com for details or contact 9958916183 / 9945767607