Follow us:              
You are here: HOME > BANGALORE > Report

Be transparent, declare assets: Hegde to judiciary

Published: Friday, Feb 3, 2012, 11:29 IST
By DNA Correspondent | Place: Bangalore | Agency: DNA

Former Lok Ayukta, Justice Santosh Hegde, said on Thursday that judges should declare their assets and liabilities in order to maintain transparency.“Let us know which judge is rich and which judge is not,” he said.

Hegde was speaking at a programme to discuss the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, held by Advocates’ Association of Bangalore. “Accountability and transparency are the two principles of the Constitution, but they do not have preferences. There is a lot of secrecy in the system,” said Hegde.

He said: “It is hard for a judge to be corrupt. Without the helping hand of the bar, a judge cannot be corrupt. Corruption in judiciary should be looked into by the bar as well. Bar should help in eliminating corruption in judiciary.” Hegde said that when he was the Lok Ayukta, he declared his assets without anybody asking him to do so. In 1999, he had given his assets and liabilities to the then Chief Justice of India. However, it was returned since this practice was not followed then.

Elsewhere, speaking in assembly, leader of the opposition, Siddaramaiah alleged that the government is not serious to punish the guilty and recover the losses from those who indulged in illegal mining.

He noted that the Lok Ayukta report had put the loss to the state exchequer because of illegal mining between 2006-07 and 2010-11 at `16,085 crore.

Hegde himself had stated that the government has not taken concrete action on the first report and, in fact, illegal mining activities increased after its submission.

“Influential ministers are involved (in illegal mining activities)”, he said, adding,BS Yeddyurappa had to resign from the post of chief minister following the Lokayukta report, while the former minister G Janardhana Reddy is in a Hyderabad jail. Law and parliamentary affairs minister S Suresh Kumar argued that the matter cannot be taken up for adjournment motion as it is not of recent occurrence. He agreed for a discussion under a different rule, following which speaker KG Bopaiah gave the ruling to that effect.

                     +    -
Share
Copyright permission mandatory to republish this article.
For reprint rights click here
Top stories on DNAIndia.com » Popular content »
C.0
Comments  |  Post a comment
Blogs »
Downloading blues

- Jayadev Calamur
C.0
©2012 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd.
D.0