Constitutional provisions protect both good, bad judges

Justice Hrishikesh Roy, who retired as a Supreme Court judge on January 31 following a five-year tenure, offered an unfiltered look at judicial challenges, from accountability and liberty to transparency.

- Utkarsh Anand

NEW DELHI: In an interview with Utkarsh Anand, he also spoke about the limitations of the redressal mechanism to deal with errant judges and the collegium system. Edited excerpts:

The Supreme Court is a unitary institution for the people of India. However, judges and benches differ starkly on issues of liberty, which is the most fundamental right. What is the solution to ensure consistency?

Each judge swears upon the same Constitution, which contains Article 21 and Article 14. So, we are not applying different laws; we are applying the same law. Now, you may be right, and there is criticism that on questions of liberty, which are crucial, stark differences can sometimes be seen. As the Supreme Court or as the higher judiciary, we are the protectors of constitutional rights and liberties. If there is a dilution in how liberty issues are addressed, those should be seen as aberrations. But eventually, even if in an individual case an error occurs, the institution is capable of correcting itself. It can course-correct and be the upholder and sentinel of liberty, which I firmly believe it is.

courts are doing enough to ensure executive accountability?