Another aspect of judicial accountability relates to arbitration work being done by retired judges/Chief Justices of the apex court for a consideration while heading some statutory commission and enjoying the perks and privileges of a sitting judge/Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

The question should not be allowed to remain ambiguous considering the increasing trend of retired judges/Chief Justices engaging in chamber practice, giving opinions which are submitted before courts or other authorities. There is need to amend Article 124 of the Constitution to make explicit what is implicit therein.

Another disturbing trend that has emerged recently is the engagement of retired Chief Justices in filing affidavits before foreign courts on behalf of private clients. It is painful to learn that while one former Chief Justice appearing for the plaintiff, a Japanese company swore an affidavit that speedy justice was a far cry in the Indian courts, another former Chief Justice appearing for the defendant gave evidence on affidavit to say that speedy disposal of cases was possible. The court will have to disbelieve one of them — an unfortunate situation indeed!

A former Chief Justice appeared in the witness box in a US District Court to depose regarding the tardiness of the Indian judicial system.

One wonders if any judge of the US/UK apex court would appear or swear an affidavit in a court in another country.

These nagging questions must find an answer if we have to maintain the dignity and majesty of our judicial system. The danger to the judiciary which is responsible for preservation of the rule of law and which is the bedrock of democracy is all from within and not  from outside.

Anguish and concern have been voiced by two former Chief Justices of India — Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, Justice J.S. Verma — and Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer and some eminent lawyers like Mr Fali S. Nariman about this disturbing phenomenon in public fora and in articles touching upon the subject.

I feel that retired Supreme Court Judges/Chief Justices should be forbidden, if necessary, by amending Article 124 from post-retirement activity which may be influenced by the earlier office they held. The remedy lies in giving them full salary as pension. The government can utilise their services as arbitrators on its behalf and could seek their advice on important matters in national interest.