Government forced to defer judges' asset bill

 In a major setback to the UPA Government, a united Opposition today stalled the introduction in the Rajya Sabha of a controversial bill, which seeks declaration of judges' assets without making them public.
    
Law minister M Veerappa Moily was forced to defer the Judges (Declaration of Assets and Liabilities) Bill, 2009 after the Opposition, including BJP and Left took strong objection to Clause six of the bill which states that High Court and Supreme Court judges would declare their assets but the same would not be made public.
    
After failing to muster support of the opposition and sensing the mood of the house, including from the Congress members, Moily said "it (introduction of the bill) is deferred".
    
The opposition to a bill at the introduction stage itself is a rare phenomenon prompting deputy chairman K Rahman Khan to cite an earlier ruling and seek the opinion of the house.
    
Congress has to go by consensus as in the 245-member house, the party and its allies have a strength of 79.
    
Most of the opposition members were harping on removal of the clause six of the bill before the government could introduce it in the house.
    
Leader of opposition Arun Jaitley, who himself is a noted lawyer, said that when a candidate contesting election had to declare his assets and liabilities making it public, why the same law cannot be applicable to the higher judiciary.
    
"This dual interpretation of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution (Fundamental right of freedom of expression) cannot be sustained..,clause 6 should be reconsidered," he said.
    
The bill proposes that the judges of the Supreme Court will furnish details of their assets and liabilities to the chief justice of India, while High Court Judges will sumbit the information to their respective Chief Justices.
    
Sitaram Yechuri (CPI-M) said that opinion of the House be taken before its introduction. His party colleague Brinda Karat said the bill violates the basic feature of the Constitution.
    
Yielding to the mood, the government would bring the bill after evolving a consensus, Moily said.
    
Disagreeing with the members' contention that the bill was violative of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, he said "it is after 60 years we are making certain attempt," to bring accountability in the judiciary.
    
Moily dismissed suggestions that the bill was circulated among the judiciary before being brought to the house.
    
At present, there is only an internal mechanism created by Supreme Court on the declaration of assets by judges. "There is no law (to deal with the issue)," he said adding "we found a lot of corruption in many places in judiciary. We need to deal with that".
    
Observing that government can hardly do anything with regard to corruption cases in judiciary, Moily said judges could not even be impeached. Only one case is pending for which the Rajya Sabha Chairman has constituted a committee to look into the issue.
    
He said the government proposes to bring a comprehensive judges enquiry bill that will deal with the issue of corruption on a much wider scale. "We are working a roadmap on judicial reforms," he said, adding national consultation would be held later this month.
    
Making a demand for reference of the bill to the Parliamentary Standing Committee, Jayanthi Natrajan (Cong) said it may be violative of Right to Information Act.
    
Noted lawyer Ram Jethmalani said the bill violates the basic feature of the Constitution. He described it as "conspiracy in corruption" and said the government was destroying the independence of judiciary by giving them a favour. "It creates suspicion that judiciary is seeking favour..."
    
D Raja (CPI) said the proposed legislation cannot be accepted and nobody was above the law.