The editorial “Not exempt from public scrutiny” (Jan.13) should serve as an eye-opener to the higher judiciary. The decision of the full bench of the Delhi High Court that the office of Chief justice of India is a public authority that comes within the ambit of the Right to Information Act has reinforced public faith in the judiciary. There is need for transparency in all democratic institutions. The observation made by the Bench that “sunlight is the best disinfectant” is forceful.
Information is power. In an open society, the members of the public should have access to information of its constitutional functionaries. No institution can inspire public confidence unless it is transparent and subject to public scrutiny.
A.S.Farida, Tiruchi
Though the RTI ruling is laudable, it merely provides for ensuring adequate transparency and public dissemination in respect of information concerning the disclosure of assets by judges. There are certain grey areas which need redress as when the Central Information Commission (CIC) in November, 2009 directed the Supreme Court ’s Public Information Officer to divulge the details relating to the (non)appointment of certain High Court judges to Supreme Court as well as correspondence between the CJI and Justice Reghupathy of the Madras High Court on alleged interference of a Union Minister in a court case, the Supreme Court was immediately approached for staying the CIC order and that too sidestepping the normal jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court stayed that order and currently the matter is sub judice. There is need to fully interpret the CJI office as a public authority as designating the same only in respect of assets disclosure is merely an half-hearted approach.
Hemant Kumar, Ambala City
The applicability of the RTI Act to the highest judiciary is the real example of democracy, which rests on transparency and accountability to the supreme authority of the country — the people. It will make judicial officials think many times before indulging in any malpractice.
Rajnish Goyal, Ludhiana
It is a landmark judgment in the judicial annals of the country and deserves to be welcomed. It has helped to reinforce the view that all are equal and no one is above the law of the land. The Supreme Court should see the spirit of the judgment and be well advised not to go on appeal in the case as that would look strange considering its various verdicts in the past that ensured transparency and accountability at many levels.
J. Anantha Padmanabhan, Srirangam
A clean judiciary is the heart of an equitable society where the rich and the influential think twice before committing a crime. However, we should do more than just merely reap the fruits of the RTI. It is our duty to protect those who are fighting against corruption. The murder of RTI activist Satish Shetty in Talegaon is a sad commentary on how law enforcement agencies fail to protect activists by not reining in criminals, who are arrested only after a murder is committed. Not only the police but the public, too, need to play a more proactive role in preventing such crimes.
K.S. Lakshmi, Madurai
The Delhi High Court does not appear to have covered itself with glory by pronouncing its full court judgment on the rights of the Supreme Court and its judges. By attempting to open a pathway to all those who relish an unholy glee to put their paws into the privacy and privileged information of a dignified and honoured person, no one is gong to gain anything except attracting media glare. Circumspection, dignity and culture demand that there should be a point where rights activists are told, thus far and no further. The Supreme Court would be well advised to get this examined dispassionately.
Ramankutty M., Tripunithura
