Cross connection

Some questions have no easy answers. What to do,for instance,when a high court judge accuses a Union minister of interference? Is it for the judiciary to investigate for contempt of court or the police? Then there is the moral dimension. After all,were the allegation to be substantiated,the ministers continuation in the Cabinet would be difficult. To top it all,Justice R. Reghupathy,a judge in the Madras high court,having declared in open court that a minister tried to influence him,is yet to name names,and has recused himself from the case. There is now uncertainty on even basic facts. While initially it was reported that the minister allegedly spoke to the judge on telephone,Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan has told this newspaper that no such call was made; Justice Reghupathys allegation is that a lawyer claimed to him that a minister was interested in the case. The way forward is such a minefield,that it would be tempting for everyone to just not answer the question,and forget such an allegation was ever made.

That would be a mistake. In the absence of transparency,gossip and innuendo reign. The name of a particular minister is doing the rounds; Former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa has pointed fingers at Union Communications Minister A. Raja. But that is unfair to him: Raja has not ever been publicly accused by the judge. If convinced of his own innocence,it is in Rajas own interest to demand a public inquiry.

Judicial transparency is no easy business. Take the declaration of judicial assets. Chief Justice Balakrishnan has no objection to Parliament passing such a law. But he points out that many judges were well-to-do lawyers before they joined the Bench. Scrutinising their assets slanders them without cause,making attracting fresh talent to the Bench difficult. Or take the demand for executive say in judicial appointments. The chief justice asks: which politician? After all,the role of a single party/leader is bound to be partisan. Equally,the way forward when a judge accuses a minister of interference requires sensitivity. But that doesnt mean it must not be attempted. For in the mean time,names will be thrown around,entire institutions tainted,and faith in the system threatened. The details of who and how can come later,but

the bottom line is this Justice Reghupathys allegations must be inquired into,and that inquiry must be transparent.