The tug of war between the judiciary and the executive is characteristic of most modern democracies, and judicial intervention in India has frequently offered clear-sighted correctives on fraught political issues. But our judiciary enjoys enormous privileges, and a credibility born of its autonomy from any other organ of the state — which makes it especially important for the judiciary to institute its own system checks. Supreme Court Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan’s call for voluntary declaration of assets by members of the higher judiciary (a process already under way) is a significant step forward. This internal monitoring must be made mandatory, however, for it to be meaningful.

While preserving the sanctity and majesty of our courts is important, the Indian judiciary is exceptionally insulated from oversight mechanisms, with its splendid disdain for mechanisms like right to information petitions. As a constitutional authority, courts are exempt from any institutional checks that other public offices have to submit to, and the judiciary has rebuffed any attempt to moderate these powers despite public mutterings about corruption and overreach, possibly with good reason since it guarantees non-manipulability. But since the judiciary cannot submit to scrutiny by external authorities, it is vital that it sets an example of integrity in governance, and provides maximum transparency of its own volition.

This self-regulation could assuage public misgivings of sweeping judicial exemption from the rules. Even though all power supposedly stems from the common citizen, it is only common citizens who have to submit to the petty strictures of authority at every point. Our political culture grinds in the difference between the officially privileged and the masses — every checkpoint in the administered life, whether airport security or tollbooths, starkly delineates ordinary citizens from those who govern them. The judiciary should be the first to abandon these cordons that mark public life. But it might be worthwhile to acknowledge that legitimate state authority does not come from a lofty distance from the public but from being responsive to public demands. The judiciary, which has always sought to align itself with citizens to balance the distortions that creep into politics, must be especially careful to be a moral exemplar.