Judiciary’s independence doesn’t mean always deciding against the govt: Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud

CJI Chandrachud shares his views on judicial independence

Outgoing Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud, in his final public address before retiring on November 10, asserted that the independence of the judiciary does not equate to consistently ruling against the government. He stressed that judges must be allowed the freedom to make decisions based on their conscience, guided by law and the Constitution, rather than external pressures or public opinion.

Addressing a gathering in Delhi, Chief Justice Chandrachud shared his views on judicial independence, calling for greater public trust in judges’ ability to make impartial decisions. He highlighted the importance of not equating judicial independence with a specific type of decision—one that simply goes against the government.

“When you decide electoral bonds, then you are very independent, but if a verdict goes in favor of the government, then you are not independent… That is not my definition of independence,” Chief Justice Chandrachud remarked, drawing attention to the public’s skewed interpretation of judicial independence.

In February 2023, the Supreme Court, under his leadership, struck down the controversial electoral bonds scheme, calling it “unconstitutional.” The decision, delivered by a five-judge Constitution Bench, was a landmark ruling that put an end to a contentious and opaque political funding mechanism that had been widely criticized for lack of transparency.

Reflecting on this ruling, the Chief Justice noted that some had labeled the Court as “very independent” for striking down the scheme, while others raised doubts about judicial impartiality when the verdict favored the government in certain cases. “Independence of the judiciary means independence from the government, but it does not mean that you should always decide against the government,” he said, emphasizing that judicial decisions should always align with the law, irrespective of political implications.

Chandrachud also pointed out that the definition of judicial independence had evolved with societal changes, particularly the rise of social media. “Today, pressure groups and interest groups, especially on electronic platforms, attempt to sway court decisions in their favor,” he noted. The Chief Justice expressed concern over the growing tendency of some to call judges “independent” only when their decisions align with a particular agenda.

He further explained, “If you do not decide in my favor, you are not independent. That is what I have an objection to. To be independent, a judge must have the independence to decide according to what their conscience tells them—of course, the conscience which is guided by law and the Constitution.”

Emphasizing the need for public trust, the Chief Justice urged the people to allow judges the freedom to make decisions that reflect their understanding of justice, whether the verdict is favorable to the government or not. “The cases which have to go against the government, we decided against the government. But if the law requires a case to be decided in favor of the government, you have to decide in accordance with the law,” he said.

Chandrachud’s remarks underline the critical balance that must be maintained for the judiciary to remain an independent, impartial pillar of democracy. “That message has to go across which is crucial to the existence of a stable and vibrant judiciary,” he said, calling for an end to the politicization of judicial decisions.

As his tenure draws to a close, the outgoing Chief Justice’s reflections on the independence of the judiciary serve as a reminder of the importance of maintaining the integrity of the judicial process, free from external influences, while ensuring that justice is served according to law.

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

The post Judiciary’s independence doesn’t mean always deciding against the govt: Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud appeared first on PGurus.