'What is legal and constitutional is moral': Justice Abhay Oka's powerful call for judicial integrity and constitutional morality

United News of India

13 hours ago

New Delhi, Aug 6 (UNI) 'Traditional morality is shaped by popular opinion. But judges are bound only by the Constitution.' In a thought-provoking keynote address that struck at the heart of judicial ethics, Justice Abhay S. Oka, former judge of the Supreme Court of India, delivered a scathing and insightful critique of the misuse of personal moral convictions in legal decision-making.
Delivering a lecture on "Morality in Judiciary: A Paradigm or a Paradox", hosted by The Global Jurists, Justice Oka made it emphatically clear that for judges, morality must align solely with constitutional and legal principles.
'My personal view is simple,' he declared. 'Something which is legal and constitutional is moral. Something which is not legal and not constitutional is immoral nothing else matters for a judge.'
Justice Oka argued that judges must resist the temptation to allow personal beliefs, societal expectations, or political noise to influence their decisions.
'A judge may follow a religion, hold personal moral values, or believe in a philosophy. But once he assumes office, these views must be locked away in a watertight compartment,' he said.
He strongly cautioned that moral convictions have no place in jurisprudence. Referring to cases where individuals spend over a decade in prison without legal evidence, he called such decisions 'moral convictions masquerading as justice.'
Justice Oka urged for a shift in how we view the judiciary at the grassroots level. 'It is wrong to call them subordinate or lower courts. They are the main courts of this country because it is here that the common man goes for justice,' he stated.
Recalling his time as Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, he said his first administrative order was to ensure the term 'subordinate courts' was discarded.
'The real mistake we made in the last 75 years was not focusing enough on the trial and district judiciary.'
Justice Oka addressed the rising pressure judges face, particularly in heinous crimes or economic offenses. He cited how public outrage, media coverage, or political statements such as a Chief Minister declaring an accused will be hanged can create an atmosphere of fear for grassroots judges.
'The involvement of large sums of money or the gravity of the allegations may be one factor, but judges must decide bail strictly within the four corners of the law,' he affirmed.
He added, 'Judges must be prepared to deliver verdicts that are not popular.'
Touching upon exceptions, he noted that in rare cases, judges may invoke Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure complete justice. However, even in such circumstances, he reiterated that decisions must stem from constitutional morality, not personal values.
He also referenced dissenting judgments such as Justice H.R. Khanna's in the ADM Jabalpur case and the Kesavananda Bharati verdict to highlight the importance of judges staying true to constitutional principles, even at great personal cost.
'Three judges who gave the majority opinion in Kesavananda Bharati were superseded. But they were not swayed by the views of the ruling government.'
Justice Oka acknowledged the flaws in the current judicial appointment system, particularly the delay between Collegium recommendations and appointments. He cited the example of Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi, who withdrew his consent for judgeship after waiting nearly a year.
'The real challenge for Chief Justices is to convince good lawyers to join the Bench. But delay in appointments dissuades them,' he said, urging immediate government attention to this issue.
Justice Oka concluded by recognizing the crisis of credibility in the judiciary and called for a recommitment to constitutional morality.
'Judges must set aside personal notions of morality, faith, religion, or political inclinations. That is the only way to meet the challenges before the judiciary today.'
'The job of a judge is not to preach. The question is not whether an action is good or bad, but whether it is legal or illegal.'
He emphasized that criticism of judgments must be legal and balanced, urging the public and professionals to acknowledge both the right and wrong decisions of the courts.
Justice Oka's powerful address served as a sobering reminder that justice cannot and must not be shaped by personal or societal moralities. Instead, it must emerge from the spirit and letter of the Constitution.
'The Constitution is our moral compass. That is the only morality a judge must know,' he concluded to resounding applause from a hall filled with eminent judges and legal luminaries.
UNI SNG RN