Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | It’s for Supreme Court to decide on RTI applicability to CJI: Attorney-General by J Venkatesan

It’s for Supreme Court to decide on RTI applicability to CJI: Attorney-General by J Venkatesan

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Jan 16, 2010   modified Modified on Jan 16, 2010

Substantial questions of law are involved 

The issues of applicability of the Right to Information Act to the office of the Chief Justice of India should be finally decided by the Supreme Court as substantial questions of law and general importance were involved, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati said on Friday.

Speaking to The Hindu, Mr. Vahanvati, who appeared on behalf of the Secretary-General of the Supreme Court, said: “Various people have publicly expressed their views that no further appeal should be filed challenging the [Delhi] High Court judgment. In fact, some have even alleged that I, in my capacity as Attorney-General, am keen that an appeal be filed.”

He pointed out that the High Court itself had granted a certificate of appeal to the Supreme Court as substantial questions of law were involved in the case. A Full Court of the Supreme Court would take the final decision on whether or not to prefer an appeal.

Mr. Vahanvati said certain issues dealt with by the Supreme Court collegium on appointment of judges, personal opinions given by judges, and response to complaints against judges could not be revealed. Doing so would affect the independence of the judiciary. “You must accept that there are various constitutional obligations where strict confidentiality is required.”

If reasons given by judges for non-selection of a judge for elevation or for some other appointment were to be disclosed, then no judge in the know of things would give a free and frank opinion. “In such matters, it is pointless to proceed on public perception, and the collegium will be justified in its wisdom not to make reasons public.”

Not only the judiciary but also the offices of the President and the Prime Minister dealt with various sensitive issues day in and day out, and there was a constitutional mandate and fiduciary principle that these must be kept confidential, Mr. Vahanvati said. “Who will tell the CJI or the judge concerned that everything he says has to be made public?”

Referring to the criticism that the Supreme Court “is deciding its own case,” Mr. Vahanvati said “this is absurd” and added “several administrative decisions have been set aside on the judicial side.” He said: “I have taken up this case on behalf of the Supreme Court not just as a matter of legal duty but on the basis of a firm conviction that the independence of the judiciary cannot be compromised by exposing every aspect of the work of the courts to public scrutiny.”


The Hindu, 16 January, 2010, http://www.hindu.com/2010/01/16/stories/2010011660981300.htm
 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close