‘Corruption in the judiciary is often over-blown by the media’

Will there be any new initiatives?

The Law Minister,for instance,has already spoken about how the Government itself

has become the biggest litigant and thus,Government versus citizen litigation must be reduced. As Solicitor General,I was a member of the Supreme Court’s arrears

committee and there are several ways in which arrears can be brought down. Also,the Prime Minister has assured me that resources will not be a constraint. This Government clearly means business and since he was heading the Administrative Reforms Commission,the Law Minister himself understands the functioning of the Government very well.

You are taking over at a time when certain live issues are being widely debated—for instance,the declaration of assets by the judiciary. Let me tell you what judges feel on this issue. Instead of an informal resolution on the subject,they want a well-drafted legislation in place. It should make clear what the format for disclosures will be; what is the precise definition of assets; what protection will be given to the disclosures; the periodicity of disclosures and so on. So,what the judiciary is stressing on is having a suitable piece of legislation.

What about the issue of corruption in the judiciary?

This is another issue that has engaged the attention of the Prime Minister since he has told me he is pained every time he reads about a corruption issue involving members of the judiciary. I am not denying that there is corruption in the judiciary but it is often over-blown by the media and a year- or two-year-old news is reported as fresh news.

As the Government’s senior-most law officer,how would you like to redefine the role of the Attorney General?

I have been a Government law officer for a decade now and am very clear that instead of a confrontationist attitude,the equation between the executive and the judiciary should be one of cooperation. Fortunately,in the last couple of years,the tone of confrontation has been toned down and I want that to be toned down further. There should be a constructive engagement of the judiciary with the executive instead of a confrontationist engagement. This,I am sure,will be a phase for the evolution of the judiciary.

Any ideas on how the over-dependence of agencies,such as the CBI,on senior law officers can be reduced?

I feel very strongly about reforms needed on the functioning of the Central agency. For one,there has to be a hallmark of specialisation even among Government lawyers in the Central agency panel in areas such as taxation,arbitration,constitutional law and so on. Not everyone can do everything. We also want to introduce a litigation planner in the Supreme Court for the Central agency so that lawyers can prepare and be fully briefed for important hearings months in advance. The Central agency will also have a fully computerised system with search engines. The planner will list all hearings for the next six months and the Supreme Court’s registry has promised full assistance for this.

What about the increase in cases against politicians that are now being monitored by the Supreme Court?

There may be a rollback on this since the judgment in the Sikkim Chief Minister’s case has been reserved by the Supreme Court. So maybe the apex court’s ruling will point to a solution.

There are some important pending proposals,which you may need to give your opinion on. One is the newly-drafted Judges Inquiry Bill and the other is the setting up of a separate Directorate of Prosecution for the CBI. What are your views on them?

It is far too early for me to comment on these issues. But the Cabinet Secretary has called for a meeting on the issue of Directorate of Prosecution and I feel the existing Malaysian and British models are very good.