The Indian Judicial System: An Epitome of Non-Transparency

The Indian Judicial System: An Epitome of Non-Transparency

The Indian judicial system, often praised for its critical role in safeguarding democracy, is increasingly seen as a reflection of non-transparency, from judicial appointments to decision-making processes. One aspect that has further exacerbated this issue is the implementation of the recommendations made by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC), which resulted in exorbitant pay and allowances for judicial officers. This significant policy decision, made without much public discussion or scrutiny, highlights the deepening divide between the judiciary and the public, especially as other sectors, including government employees, remain unprivileged in comparison. While the judiciary is supposed to serve as an impartial body representing the people, the lack of transparency in such matters has led to growing dissatisfaction and concerns about equity within the Indian system.

The Dark Cloud of Secrecy

India's judicial system has long been shrouded in secrecy. The practice of "in-chamber" hearings, where critical decisions are made behind closed doors, is often justified as a way to protect the dignity of the court. However, this only fuels suspicions of bias and unfairness. When legal proceedings are shielded from public view, it fosters an environment where the public has little insight into how cases are decided. Given that the judiciary holds such power in the lives of ordinary citizens, this lack of transparency is particularly troubling.

The Pay Hike: A Reflection of Systemic Inequality?

One of the most glaring issues contributing to the opacity of the judicial system is the implementation of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission's recommendations, which dramatically increased the salaries and allowances of judicial officers across the country. The move, while ostensibly designed to ensure that judges were compensated fairly and that the judiciary remained attractive to the best talent, has raised significant concerns. The judicial officers, particularly those in higher courts, saw their pay rise substantially—sometimes by as much as 100%—resulting in a significant burden on the taxpayer.

However, the timing and implementation of these pay hikes have been met with criticism. While the judiciary enjoys this windfall, other sectors, such as public education, health, and the police, continue to suffer from chronic underfunding and underpay. Public sector workers, many of whom are responsible for the day-to-day functioning of the state, often find themselves at the bottom of the pay scale. Meanwhile, judicial officers, who already earn more than their counterparts in other government sectors, are rewarded handsomely for their work, which, in the eyes of many, is a disproportionate distribution of public resources.

While judges undoubtedly work under immense pressure, the question arises: should they be rewarded with exorbitant pay hikes when other sectors, crucial to the nation’s functioning, continue to operate on shoestring budgets? The disparity between the judicial sector and other public services only deepens the sense of inequality, and further alienates the public from the judiciary.

Judicial Appointments: A Cloud of Uncertainty

The lack of transparency is also apparent in the judicial appointment process. The collegium system—whereby senior judges select their peers—has been the subject of considerable debate. Though it was initially intended to protect judicial independence, the lack of transparency in this process has led to accusations of favoritism, nepotism, and political interference. The absence of clear and public criteria in judicial appointments further erodes the faith that citizens have in the fairness of the judicial system.

Despite calls for reform, including suggestions to bring about more democratic and transparent processes, the collegium system remains largely insulated from public scrutiny. This opacity around appointments results in growing concerns that the judicial system is not as impartial as it purports to be, especially when the compensation of judicial officers has been elevated so substantially.

The Issue of Accountability: A System Above the Law?

Accountability is another area where the Indian judicial system falls short. Judges, once appointed, are largely immune from any public scrutiny or oversight. The absence of an effective mechanism to discipline judges in cases of misconduct contributes to the sense of impunity within the judiciary. While judicial independence is a cornerstone of the system, it should not come at the cost of accountability. The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, which sought to address this issue, has yet to be passed, leaving the judiciary largely unaccountable for its actions.

Without transparency in judicial appointments, decision-making, or accountability, it’s no wonder that public faith in the system has been eroding steadily. When there is no mechanism for questioning a judge’s ruling or actions, especially with the enormous power and perks they now enjoy, the system becomes increasingly out of touch with the people it serves.

The Technology Gap: A Barrier to Access

While the judiciary’s role in upholding justice is pivotal, the lack of transparency in how it operates has significant practical implications. One of the most glaring issues in terms of transparency is the slow adoption of technology. Despite several attempts to digitize court records and proceedings, much of the Indian judiciary continues to rely on outdated systems that create a considerable information gap.

The government’s initiatives such as the e-Courts Project have made some progress in digitalizing case records and judgments, but a comprehensive, user-friendly digital court system is still largely absent. Ordinary citizens often find themselves navigating a complex and opaque system where case information is difficult to access. This digital gap exacerbates the problem of transparency and limits the ability of the public to hold the judiciary accountable.

The Growing Disconnect Between the Judiciary and the Public

The pay hikes for judicial officers, when juxtaposed with the suffering of millions in other public sectors, have compounded the disconnect between the judiciary and the citizens it serves. When judges are compensated handsomely and enjoy perks far above what most government employees can hope for, the sense of fairness and equity that the judicial system is supposed to represent becomes distorted. Public sector workers, such as teachers, doctors, and police officers, who work under far more challenging conditions and receive much lower pay, begin to feel sidelined in the very system that is supposed to serve them.

Public trust in the judiciary, already fragile due to its opaque decision-making processes and lack of accountability, is further eroded by the perception that the judiciary is increasingly disconnected from the realities that ordinary citizens face. When the judiciary receives pay hikes without sufficient public discussion and in the face of widespread underinvestment in other crucial sectors, it fosters resentment rather than trust.

The Way Forward: Reforming a Failing System

If the Indian judicial system is to truly serve the people, it must reform its most opaque practices. First, judicial appointments need to be made more transparent. There must be a clear, merit-based system for selecting judges, with public oversight to ensure fairness. The system of "in-chamber" hearings should be reviewed to ensure that public scrutiny is allowed where appropriate.

Moreover, the implementation of pay hikes should be reconsidered in the context of broader economic inequality. Judicial officers should receive compensation that reflects their importance, but it must not come at the expense of other public servants or the public good. The focus should be on achieving a balance that ensures fair pay for all sectors while maintaining the dignity and integrity of the judiciary.

Finally, greater efforts must be made to digitize the judicial system. A fully integrated, transparent, and accessible digital system would allow citizens to track cases in real time, access judgments, and understand the intricacies of the judicial process. This could go a long way in bridging the gap between the judiciary and the people it serves.

Conclusion

While the Indian judiciary has a fundamental role in ensuring justice and protecting the rule of law, its non-transparency—highlighted by opaque judicial appointments, excessive pay hikes, and slow technological adoption—has become a major stumbling block in building public trust. For the judiciary to truly serve the people, it must embrace transparency, accountability, and reform. Only then can it hope to restore its position as a fair, impartial, and trusted pillar of democracy.