Chief Justice of India, Dr. DY Chandrachud, recently declared that he has never faced political pressure from any government during his 24-year tenure as a judge. Speaking at a Q&A session organized by the Oxford Union, CJI Chandrachud addressed concerns about political pressure on the judiciary, especially in recent years.
He stated, “Political pressure, if you ask me in the sense of pressure from the government, I would tell you that in the 24 years I have been a judge, I have never faced a sense of political pressure from the powers that be.” He emphasized that judges in India typically live lives isolated from the political branch of the government.
CJI Chandrachud also acknowledged that judges are aware of the potential political ramifications of their decisions. He clarified that this awareness is not political pressure but rather an understanding of the likely impact of their rulings on the broader polity, particularly in constitutional cases.
Discussing “social pressure,” CJI Chandrachud noted that judges often consider the societal impact of their judgments. “Many of the cases we decide involve intense societal impacts. As judges, I believe it is our duty to be cognizant of the impact of our decisions on the social ordering which we are ultimately going to affect.”
When asked how the Indian judiciary balances independence, social justice, and minority rights in a politically charged atmosphere, CJI Chandrachud emphasized the importance of trained judges deciding disputes based on constitutional principles rather than the passions of the moment.
In response to questions about judicial activism, public confidence in the judiciary, case pendency, and social media pressure on judges, CJI Chandrachud clarified that interpreting the law to uphold constitutional values is not activism but a judge’s duty. “When judges are interpreting the Constitution, they are not being activists. It is their duty. The work we do is a matter of plain duty and nothing more than that,” he stated, highlighting the separation of powers and the specific roles assigned to each state organ by the Constitution.
Addressing the issue of case pendency, CJI Chandrachud attributed it to the lack of sufficient judges, noting that India’s judge-to-population ratio is among the lowest in the world. He mentioned ongoing efforts to increase the judiciary’s strength at all levels and to fill vacancies promptly. Technological advancements and the use of Artificial Intelligence are also being employed to make the judiciary more transparent and accessible.
CJI Chandrachud opined that the high number of cases being filed in Indian courts indicates a high level of public trust in the judiciary, though he admitted that more needs to be done to increase this trust. “The best way is for the Courts to be transparent and accountable to the people,” he said, noting that efforts are being made to enhance transparency and accountability within the judiciary.
