The code of conduct judges need to follow
Source: The Hindu
Syllabus context: GS II Polity and Governance
Code of Conduct for Judges: Ethics, Accountability, and Impeachment Process
The judiciary, as the guardian of the Constitution, derives its power from two primary sources: public trust in its authority and the integrity of its conduct. Instances that compromise these principles, such as the controversial remarks by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court, underline the critical importance of ethical standards and accountability in the judiciary.
Judicial Ethics: Codes and Principles
- Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997):
- Adopted by the Supreme Court to codify judicial ethics, this serves as the primary code of conduct for judges.
- Key tenets include:
- Impartiality: A judge’s behavior must reaffirm public faith in the judiciary’s impartiality.
- Accountability: Judges must avoid acts, in personal or official capacity, that erode public trust.
- Public Scrutiny: Judges are constantly under public gaze, necessitating dignified conduct at all times.
- Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002):
- Provides a global framework for regulating judicial conduct.
- Key principles:
- Preserving Dignity: Judges must act in a way that upholds the dignity and independence of the judiciary.
- Understanding Diversity: Judges must recognize societal diversity and ensure equality in their conduct.
- Freedom of Expression: While judges have the right to free speech, it must not compromise judicial impartiality.
Recent Controversy: Ethical Implications
Justice Yadav’s remarks at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event have raised serious concerns about judicial neutrality and adherence to ethical principles. His comments, which appeared to favor a particular community, drew criticism for:
- Compromising impartiality: Public perception of bias erodes the judiciary’s integrity.
- Violating the judicial code: Statements endorsing divisive views contradict the principles of equality and dignity mandated by judicial ethics.
- Political entanglement: Participation in ideologically-driven events undermines the perception of judicial independence.
Reactions include:
- Supreme Court Action: The apex court has sought details from the Allahabad High Court, signaling a serious approach toward maintaining judicial accountability.
- Public Criticism: Organizations like the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms and senior advocates like Kapil Sibal have called for strong measures, including impeachment, to address such behavior.
Impeachment Process for Judges
The Constitution outlines a stringent process for removing judges to ensure judicial independence while upholding accountability:
- Grounds for Removal:
- Judges can be removed for proved misbehavior or incapacity, as per Articles 124(4) and 217 of the Constitution.
- Procedure:
- Initiation: A motion for removal must be signed by 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members.
- Investigation: A three-member committee, comprising a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and a distinguished jurist, investigates the allegations.
- Parliamentary Approval: The motion requires a special majority (two-thirds of members present and voting and a majority of the total strength) in both Houses of Parliament.
- Presidential Order: If approved, the President issues an order for removal.
- In-house Mechanism:
- Introduced in 1999 and formalized in 2014, this allows judges facing serious allegations to take voluntary retirement to avoid public impeachment.
- The Chief Justice of India (CJI) plays a key role in initiating inquiries, appointing committees, and recommending actions to the President.
Judicial Accountability and Challenges
- Ethical Challenges:
- Bias and Prejudice: Public remarks or actions perceived as biased undermine judicial impartiality.
- Transparency vs. Independence: Balancing public accountability with the judiciary’s independent functioning is a persistent challenge.
- Systemic Challenges:
- Lack of clarity in disciplinary procedures for judges below the threshold of impeachment.
- Resistance to reforms that demand greater transparency in judicial appointments and conduct.
- Public Perception:
- Instances like Justice Yadav’s remarks highlight the need for continuous ethical reinforcement to sustain public confidence in the judiciary.
International Best Practices
- United Kingdom:
- Judges are held accountable through the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO), which investigates complaints about judicial misconduct.
- United States:
- Federal judges can be impeached by Congress for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” though instances are rare.
- Canada:
- The Canadian Judicial Council investigates complaints and recommends actions, including removal, if warranted.
India can adopt a more structured approach, inspired by such models, to address allegations of judicial misconduct swiftly and transparently.
Policy Recommendations
- Strengthening Judicial Ethics:
- Periodic sensitization programs to reinforce ethical standards among judges.
- Introduction of an independent Judicial Oversight Body to handle misconduct allegations.
- Enhancing Accountability Mechanisms:
- Clear guidelines for non-impeachable offenses, ensuring minor ethical breaches are also addressed.
- Public disclosure of actions taken against erring judges to restore public trust.
- Legislative and Institutional Reforms:
- Amendments to strengthen the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, for faster and more transparent proceedings.
- Improved grievance redressal mechanisms for complaints against judges.
- Promoting Diversity Awareness:
- Training programs for judges to recognize and respect India’s social, cultural, and religious diversity.
Conclusion
Judicial ethics and accountability are pillars of a functioning democracy. Instances like Justice Yadav’s remarks underscore the need for adherence to established codes of conduct, impartiality, and judicial independence. While impeachment remains the ultimate measure, institutional mechanisms for addressing misconduct at all levels are essential for maintaining public trust. Judicial reforms, coupled with ethical reinforcement, will ensure the judiciary remains the custodian of constitutional values and the people’s faith.
Value Addition
- Quotes:
- “Judges should be like Caesar’s wife—above suspicion.” — Lord Denning
- “Impartiality is the soul of the judiciary.” — Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer
The significance of ANI versus OpenAI
Source: The Hindu
Syllabus context: GS II Governance and International Relations
The ANI vs OpenAI Case: Implications for Copyright, AI Regulation, and Data Sovereignty
The ANI lawsuit against OpenAI marks a pivotal moment in India’s legal discourse on copyright, artificial intelligence (AI), and data sovereignty. As generative AI (GenAI) continues to transform content creation and dissemination, the case brings to the forefront critical issues of intellectual property rights, regulatory gaps, and the challenges of territorial jurisdiction. This has far-reaching implications for India’s policy landscape, particularly in fostering innovation while safeguarding the rights of content creators.
The Core Issues
- Copyright Infringement and Fair Use:
- ANI’s Claims:
- OpenAI used ANI’s copyrighted content for training its Large Language Model (LLM) without authorization.
- ANI argued that OpenAI’s opt-out policy is ineffective due to the widespread republication of its content by third parties, enabling indirect scraping.
- Instances of verbatim reproduction and fabricated responses by ChatGPT were cited, including false attributions to ANI.
- OpenAI’s Defence:
- Claimed that its AI does not replicate content verbatim but reformulates it sufficiently to qualify under copyright exceptions.
- Defended the use of data under the principles of fair use and text and data mining (TDM) for innovation and research.
- Highlighted the territorial limitations of Indian jurisdiction over its operations, as training and data processing occur outside India.
- ANI’s Claims:
- Territoriality and Data Sovereignty:
- OpenAI emphasized that its operations are cloud-based and distributed across global servers, making it challenging to apply Indian territorial laws.
- ANI’s claims underscore the need to address jurisdictional complexities, especially for AI platforms that process Indian-origin data in offshore environments.
- Regulatory Gaps in Indian Law:
- The Indian Copyright Act does not explicitly address the use of copyrighted content for AI training models or TDM practices.
- The absence of a comprehensive legal framework for AI raises questions about balancing innovation with intellectual property rights.
Policy and Legal Implications
- Balancing Copyright and Innovation:
- Fair Use vs Copyright Protection:
- Fair use, a cornerstone of innovation, allows limited use of copyrighted material for research and public benefit. However, ANI’s case exposes the ambiguity in extending this principle to AI training models.
- India’s Copyright Act lacks explicit provisions for AI, creating a grey area regarding the legality of using copyrighted material in LLMs.
- Permissionless Innovation:
- OpenAI’s defence rests on the principle of allowing innovation by default unless significant harm is proven.
- Policymakers must strike a balance, ensuring that AI development is not stifled while safeguarding the rights of content creators.
- Fair Use vs Copyright Protection:
- Territoriality and Data Sovereignty:
- With AI systems relying on globally dispersed data, the concept of territoriality faces limitations.
- India’s focus on data sovereignty, as reflected in laws like the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, must evolve to address the unique challenges posed by distributed AI systems.
- Strengthening AI Governance:
- The case highlights the urgent need for an AI-specific legal framework in India, addressing issues like:
- Copyright exceptions for AI training.
- Clear guidelines for TDM practices.
- Accountability for fabricated content and false attributions by AI models.
- A National AI Policy should promote innovation while safeguarding individual and organizational rights, aligning with global best practices.
- The case highlights the urgent need for an AI-specific legal framework in India, addressing issues like:
Global Context and Comparisons
- International Precedents:
- Countries like the U.S. and the EU are exploring nuanced approaches to AI and copyright.
- The EU’s Copyright Directive includes TDM exceptions for research but mandates licensing for commercial use.
- The U.S. relies on broad interpretations of fair use but faces ongoing legal challenges over AI’s use of copyrighted material.
- Lessons for India:
- India can draw from the EU model, incorporating TDM provisions to encourage AI innovation while protecting copyright.
- Adopting opt-in systems for data usage, similar to emerging practices globally, could offer greater transparency and consent.
Recommendations for Policymakers
- Comprehensive AI Framework:
- Enact legislation that addresses copyright, fair use, and data usage for AI training.
- Introduce TDM-specific provisions to facilitate innovation while ensuring copyright compliance.
- Strengthening Data Sovereignty:
- Develop mechanisms to regulate offshore processing of Indian-origin data, ensuring accountability for foreign AI platforms.
- Leverage frameworks like the India Data Accessibility and Use Policy to promote secure and ethical data usage.
- Accountability for AI Misuse:
- Mandate transparent reporting by AI firms regarding data sources and content generation practices.
- Establish grievance redressal mechanisms for fabricated or misleading AI-generated content.
- Public-Private Collaboration:
- Encourage partnerships between AI firms, news publishers, and researchers to create ethical and innovative models for data usage.
- Capacity Building:
- Invest in judicial and regulatory capacity to address complex issues in AI and copyright law.
- Foster public awareness of intellectual property rights and AI ethics.
Conclusion
The ANI vs OpenAI case underscores the complexities of regulating emerging technologies in a rapidly evolving digital ecosystem. While the case has the potential to set crucial legal precedents in India, it also highlights the need for a balanced approach to AI governance that fosters innovation, protects intellectual property rights, and upholds data sovereignty. Policymakers must leverage this opportunity to establish India as a leader in ethical and inclusive AI development.
PM Modi to release collected works of Subramania Bharati
Source: The Hindu
Syllabus context: History and Culture
PM Modi to Release Collected Works of Subramania Bharati: A Tribute to the Poet and Freedom Fighter
Prime Minister Narendra Modi will release a comprehensive and annotated collection of the works of Tamil poet, freedom fighter, and social reformer Subramania Bharati in New Delhi on December 11, marking his birth anniversary. This initiative underscores the significance of Bharati’s contributions to India’s cultural and freedom movements and is a step towards preserving and propagating his legacy.
Historical and Cultural Significance of Subramania Bharati
Subramania Bharati (1882–1921) was a visionary poet, journalist, and social reformer whose works ignited a sense of patriotism and cultural pride among Indians. His writings:
- Advocated national unity, social equality, and women’s empowerment.
- Highlighted India’s spiritual heritage and cultural ethos in a language that resonated with the masses.
- Played a crucial role in inspiring resistance against colonial rule.
His works remain a cornerstone of Tamil literature and are celebrated for their progressive outlook, blending traditional values with modern ideas. In recognition of his contributions, his writings were nationalized by the Tamil Nadu government in 1949, a rare honor for any literary figure.
About the Compendium
The release of Bharati’s collected works marks the first time his writings will be compiled comprehensively in a single place. The compilation, consisting of 23 volumes, has been meticulously curated by Seeni Viswanathan, a nonagenarian scholar who has dedicated decades to researching and unearthing Bharati’s works. Key features of the compendium include:
- Detailed annotations and explanations of Bharati’s texts.
- Historical and philosophical context, providing insights into his thoughts and their relevance.
- Inclusion of rare documents and background information, enriching the understanding of his contributions.
The collection has been published by the Alliance Company, ensuring accessibility for future generations.
Role of Subramania Bharati in Journalism and Literature
Bharati’s role as a journalist was instrumental in disseminating his reformist ideas.
- He contributed extensively to The Hindu, advocating for social and political reforms.
- His writings in newspapers and journals inspired mass movements and highlighted the plight of marginalized communities.
A compilation of his writings from The Hindu, edited by historian A.R. Venkatachalapathy, was published in 2023, showcasing his enduring influence on Indian journalism and public discourse.
Relevance of Bharati’s Ideals in Contemporary India
- Patriotism and National Integration:
Bharati’s vision of a united India, transcending caste, religion, and regional barriers, remains crucial in addressing current challenges to social harmony. - Women’s Empowerment:
Bharati’s call for gender equality resonates with India’s ongoing efforts to promote women’s rights and their participation in all spheres of life. - Social Justice:
His advocacy for abolishing untouchability and uplifting marginalized communities aligns with India’s constitutional commitment to social justice. - Cultural Renaissance:
Bharati’s works serve as a reminder of India’s rich cultural heritage and the need to preserve it in the face of globalization.
Conclusion
The release of Subramania Bharati’s collected works is a significant step in preserving and celebrating the legacy of one of India’s foremost cultural icons. It not only honors Bharati’s unparalleled contributions but also offers an opportunity to reflect on the enduring relevance of his ideas in shaping a progressive and inclusive India. The initiative reaffirms the government’s commitment to recognizing and promoting India’s cultural and intellectual heritage.
The president’s Power to issue pardon in USA and INDIA
Source: Indian Express
Syllabus context: GS II Governance and Constitution
Comparative Analysis: Power to Pardon in the United States and India
The power to pardon is a significant aspect of the executive authority in both the United States and India, reflecting the constitutional frameworks of each country. While similar in essence, the exercise and scope of this power differ in key aspects.
Power to Pardon in the United States
Constitutional Basis
- Article 2, Section II, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution empowers the President to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
- A presidential pardon eliminates the punishment imposed for a federal offence but does not nullify the conviction itself.
Historical Origins
- The U.S. pardon power is rooted in English history, where the King’s authority to pardon was extended to the American colonies. This tradition influenced the drafting of the U.S. Constitution.
Administration
- The Office of the Pardon Attorney under the Department of Justice processes pardon petitions, conducting reviews and FBI background checks before making non-binding recommendations to the President.
Scope and Limitations
- Jurisdiction:
- The President can pardon only federal crimes and cannot extend this power to state-specific offences.
- Timing:
- A pardon can be granted at any stage, including before charges are filed, as established in the Ex Parte Garland case (1866).
- Impeachment:
- The President cannot pardon cases of impeachment.
Pre-Emptive Pardons
- While the President cannot pardon crimes not yet committed, pre-emptive pardons for past acts before charges or sentencing are permissible.
- Examples:
- President Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon after the Watergate scandal.
- Abraham Lincoln’s pre-emptive pardons during the Civil War.
Interpretation and Controversies
- A pardon does not imply innocence but eliminates punishment.
- Whether a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt remains a grey area.
Power to Pardon in India
Constitutional Basis
- Article 72 of the Indian Constitution empowers the President to:
- Grant pardons, reprieves, respites, or remissions of punishment.
- Suspend, remit, or commute sentences.
- The scope includes:
- Court-martial cases.
- Offences under laws relating to the Union’s executive power.
- Death sentences.
Scope and Limitations
- Advisory Role:
- The President must act on the advice of the Union Council of Ministers, as upheld in Maru Ram v. Union of India (1980).
- Judicial Review:
- The judiciary can review a pardon only in rare cases where it is deemed irrational, discriminatory, mala fide, or irrelevant.
- Application:
- Unlike the U.S., where a pardon can be granted pre-emptively, in India, pardons apply only post-conviction.
Relevance of Court-Mandated Guidelines
- In Epuru Sudhakar v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (2006), the Supreme Court stressed that pardons must adhere to principles of fairness, avoiding arbitrariness or political bias.
Key Differences
| Aspect | United States | India |
| Constitutional Authority | Article 2, Section II, Clause 1 | Article 72 |
| Scope | Federal offences; no state-specific crimes | Union laws, court-martial cases, and death sentences |
| Role of Advisors | Decision is at the President’s discretion | Based on advice of the Council of Ministers |
| Pre-Emptive Pardons | Allowed after a crime is committed | Not applicable; pardons are post-conviction |
| Judicial Review | Limited; largely discretionary | Permissible in rare cases of mala fide exercise |
Conclusion
The power to pardon reflects the balance between justice and mercy within a constitutional framework. In the U.S., the President enjoys broader discretionary authority, including pre-emptive pardons. In contrast, India’s system ensures checks through advisory mechanisms and judicial review, emphasizing fairness and accountability. Both systems underline the importance of this extraordinary power in upholding the rule of law and addressing exceptional circumstances.
