1 Notes Submitted by Audhinarayana Vavili, Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri for workshop on 26-9-2015 on “Canons of Judicial Ethics, conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”. ****** Abstract: The greatest strength of the judiciary is the faith of the people in it. Faith, confidence and acceptability cannot be commanded; they have to be earned. And that can be done only by developing the inner strength of morality and ethics. This note contains the meaning and scope of Judicial ethics, conduct, character and Integrity of a judicial officer and various instruments wherein a judicial officer is obligated in complying the same without any deviation from the standards set out therein. Further it is also discussed with authorities of Hon‟ble Supreme Court from time to time with regarding the ethos mandated by virtue of office of judicial officer. This note insists the need of judicial accountability and finally concludes with an observation that presses for independence of judiciary with check and balances within its system. Introduction: Meaning of Canons: Canons are the first verse of the first chapter of a book whose pages are infinite. Observance of Canons of Judicial Ethics enables the judiciary to struggle with confidence; to chasten oneself and be wise and to learn by themselves the true values of judicial life. The discharge of judicial function is an act of divinity. Perfection in performance of judicial functions is not achieved solely by logic or reason. There is a mystic power which drives the Earth and the Sun, every breeze on a flower and every smile on a child and every breath which we take. It is this endurance and consciousness which enables the participation of the infinite forces which command us in our thought and action, which, expressed in simple terms and concisely put, is called the „Canons of Judicial Ethics‟ 1 . 1 Hon’ble Shri R.C. Lahoti, Former Chief Justice of India at lecture on Canons of Judicial Ethics dated 22nd February, 2005 at pp 12.
102
Embed
Notes Submitted by Audhinarayana Vavili, Addl. Junior Civil Judge ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Notes Submitted by Audhinarayana Vavili, Addl. Junior Civil
Judge, Kadiri for workshop on 26-9-2015 on “Canons of Judicial
Ethics, conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”.
******
Abstract: The greatest strength of the judiciary is the faith of the
people in it. Faith, confidence and acceptability cannot be
commanded; they have to be earned. And that can be done only by
developing the inner strength of morality and ethics. This note
contains the meaning and scope of Judicial ethics, conduct, character
and Integrity of a judicial officer and various instruments wherein a
judicial officer is obligated in complying the same without any
deviation from the standards set out therein. Further it is also
discussed with authorities of Hon‟ble Supreme Court from time to
time with regarding the ethos mandated by virtue of office of judicial
officer. This note insists the need of judicial accountability and finally
concludes with an observation that presses for independence of
judiciary with check and balances within its system.
Introduction:
Meaning of Canons:
Canons are the first verse of the first chapter of a book whose pages
are infinite. Observance of Canons of Judicial Ethics enables the judiciary to
struggle with confidence; to chasten oneself and be wise and to learn by
themselves the true values of judicial life. The discharge of judicial function
is an act of divinity. Perfection in performance of judicial functions is not
achieved solely by logic or reason. There is a mystic power which drives
the Earth and the Sun, every breeze on a flower and every smile on a child
and every breath which we take. It is this endurance and consciousness
which enables the participation of the infinite forces which command us in
our thought and action, which, expressed in simple terms and concisely
put, is called the „Canons of Judicial Ethics‟1.
1 Hon’ble Shri R.C. Lahoti, Former Chief Justice of India at lecture on Canons of Judicial Ethics dated 22nd
February, 2005 at pp 12.
2
Cannons Vs Principles
'Principles' are fundamental truth, the axioms, the code of right
conduct. Much of these remain confined to theory or hidden in books.
Canons are the type or the rules perfected by the principles put to practice.
Principles may be a faculty of the mind, a source of action which are a
pleasure to preach or read. 'Canons' are principles put into practice so as to
be recognized as rules of conduct commanding acceptability akin to
religion or firm faith, the departure wherefrom would be not a pardonable
mistake but an unpardonable sin.
Meaning of Ethics:
Morality or ethics is the science of conduct. Ethics is the study of
what is right or good in conduct. Ethical science shows the way in which
human beings should behave towards one another, as well as towards
other creatures. It contains systematized principles on which a man should
act. Ethics is right conduct or Sadachara. Ethics and morality cannot be
founded on authority thrust upon from outside. They are the matters of
conscience which sprout from within.
Judicial Ethics:
Canons of judicial ethics have been attempted, time and again, to be
drafted as a Code. Several documents of authority and authenticity are
available as drafted or crafted by several fora at the national and
international level. The fact remains that such a code is difficult to be
framed and certainly cannot be consigned to a straitjacket. Mostly these
canons have originated in and have been handed down by generation after
generation of judges by tradition and conventions.
Socrates advocated judges to hear courteously, answer wisely,
consider soberly and decide impartially. Alexander Hamilton once said
___ "The judiciary . . . has no influence over either the sword or the purse;
no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society, and can
take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither
Force nor Will but merely judgment? ".
Justice J.B. Thomas of Australia said as2
2 [Judicial Ethics in Australia, 2d ed. Sydney: LBC Information Services,
1997]
3
“Some standards can be prescribed by law, but the spirit of, and the quality
of the service rendered by; a profession depends far more on its observance
of ethical standards. These are far more rigorous than legal standards....
They are learnt not by precept but by the example and influence of
respected peers. Judicial standards are acquired, so to speak, by
professional osmosis. They are enforced immediately by conscience.”
They are three important documents which mandates the ethic of
judges in the all levels right from Supreme Court to Sub-ordinate Courts.
They are:
(i) Restatement of Values of Judicial Life adopted by the Chief Justices'
Conference of India, 1999
(ii) The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002
(iii) The Oath of a Judge at the time of taking over the judicial offices.
(i) Restatement of Values of Judicial Life adopted by the Chief Justices'
Conference of India, 1999
Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1999) On May 7, 1997, the
Supreme Court of India in its Full Court adopted a Charter called the "
Restatement of Values of Judicial Life" to serve as a guide to be observed
by Judges, essential for independent, strong and respected judiciary,
indispensable in the impartial administration of justice. This Resolution
was preceded by a draft statement circulated to all the High Courts of the
country and suitably redrafted in the light of the suggestions received. It
has been described as the 'restatement of the preexisting and universally
accepted norms, guidelines and conventions' observed by Judges. It is a
complete code of the canons of judicial ethics. It reads as under:
(1) Justice must not merely be done but it must also be seen to be done. The
behavior and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must reaffirm
the people' s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary. Accordingly, any
act of a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court, whether in official
or personal capacity, which erodes the credibility of this perception, has
to be avoided.
4
(2) A Judge should not contest the election to any office of a Club, society
or other association; further he shall not hold such elective office except
in a society or association connected with the law.
(3) Close association with individual members of the Bar, particularly
those who practice in the same court, shall be eschewed.
(4) A Judge should not permit any member of his immediate family, such
as spouse, son, daughter, son-in-law or daughter15 in-law or any other
close relative, if a member of the Bar, to appear before him or even be
associated in any manner with a cause to be dealt with by him.
(5) No member of his family, who is a member of the Bar, shall be
permitted to use the residence in which the Judge actually resides or
other facilities for professional work.
(6) A Judge should practice a degree of aloofness consistent with the
dignity of his office.
(7) A Judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a member of his
family, a close relation or a friend is concerned.
(8) A Judge shall not enter into public debate or express his views in public
on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to
arise for judicial determination.
(9) A Judge is expected to let his judgments speak for themselves. He shall
not give interviews to the media.
(10) A Judge shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from his family,
close relations and friends.
(11) A Judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a company in
which he holds shares is concerned unless he has disclosed his
interest and no objection to his hearing and deciding the matter is
raised.
(12) A Judge shall not speculate in shares, stocks or the like.
(13) A Judge should not engage directly or indirectly in trade or business,
either by himself or in association with any other person. (Publication
of a legal treatise or any activity in the nature of a hobby shall not be
construed as trade or business).
5
(14) A Judge should not ask for, accept contributions or otherwise actively
associate himself with the raising of any fund for any purpose.
(15) A Judge should not seek any financial benefit in the form of a
perquisite or privilege attached to his office unless it is clearly
available. Any doubt in this behalf must be got resolved and clarified
through the Chief Justice.
(16) Every Judge must at all times be conscious that he is under the public
gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is
unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in
which that office is held.
These are only the "Restatement of the Values of Judicial Life" and
are not meant to be exhaustive but illustrative of what is expected of a
Judge. The above "restatement" was ratified and adopted by Indian
Judiciary in the Chief Justices' Conference 1999. All the High Courts in the
country have also adopted the same in their respective Full Court Meetings
(ii) The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002.
The Bangalore Draft Principles The values of judicial ethics which the
Bangalore Principles crystallises are : (i) independence (ii) impartiality , (iii)
integrity, (iv) propriety (v) equality and (vi) competence & diligence.
(iii) The Oath of a Judge at the time of taking over the judicial offices:
The oath taken by the Judges at the time of taking over the judicial
offices reminds them of their responsibilities and sums up the subject at
hand truly, fully and effectually. It obliges them to be faithful to the
Constitution of India. They undertake that they shall uphold the
sovereignty & integrity of India and to truly and faithfully perform the
duties of their offices without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and in
doing so shall render judgment to the best of their ability and knowledge.
This in a way summarizes the code of ethics for those holding judicial
offices.
Meaning of Conduct and Character:
People would refer to words character, conduct, nature or disposition
and reputation of a person. It is said that “character‟ is what you are and
“conduct” is what other see. As Lord denning observed „ A Man‟s
character, it is sometimes said, is what he in fact is, where as his reputation
is what others think he is.” Thus, nature and disposition is what you are
6
and reputation is what others think of you. In other words, character and
nature are inherent and internal to a person and unseen by others, whereas
conduct is manifest3. It is therefore, conduct is external behavior and
character is the aggregate of peculiar qualities which constitute personal
individuality.
Integrity:
“Integrity according to Oxford dictionary is moral uprightness. The
word integrity depicts sterling character with firm adherence to a code of
moral values. „Judiciary is an integrity institution‟. Therefore, Judicial
Officers should possess the sterling quality of integrity. Integrity is the
hallmark of judicial discipline apart from others as reminded by the
Hon‟ble Apex Court in Tarak Singh vs. Jyoti Basu4, To quote:
“ Integrity is the hallmark of judicial discipline, apart from others. It
is high time the judiciary took utmost care to see that the temple of justice
does not crack from inside, which will lead to a catastrophe in the judicial-
delivery system resulting in the failure of public confidence in the system.
It must be remembered that woodpeckers inside pose a larger threat than
the storm outside.”
In High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan vs. Ramesh Chand
Paliwal5, Judges have been described as „hermits‟, further reminding that,
“they have to live and behave like hermits, who have no desire or
aspiration, having shed it through penance. Their mission is to supply light
and not heat”.
In High Court of Judicature at Bombay vs. Uday Singh6, in the
matter of maintenance of discipline, the Hon‟ble Apex Court stated as
follows:
………..“Maintenance of discipline in the judicial service is a paramount
matter. Acceptability of the judgment depends upon the credibility of the
conduct, honesty, integrity and character of the officer. The confidence of
the litigating public gets affected or shaken by lack of integrity and
character of Judicial Officer.”……
3 The Indian Evidence Act: A Critical Commentary Covering Emerging Issues and International Developments by Dr.
V Nageswara Rao, First Edition,2012 at page 334. 4 (2005)1 SCC 201
5 (1998) 2 SCC 72
6 (2000) 1 SCC 416
7
In Daya Shankar vs. High Court of Allahabad7, the Hon‟ble Supreme
Court set the following standard:
“Judicial officers cannot have two standards, one in the court and another
outside the court. They must have only one standard of rectitude, honesty
and integrity. They cannot act even remotely unworthy of the office they
occupy.”
Any power in absence of accountability would turn into a tyranny. It
is the cardinal pre-requisite of democracy and rule of law that power is
accompanied by accountability. Judges can be accountable only by
demonstrating exemplary conduct and behavior and showing a cultured
image. Some critics have accused judges to be prone to developing “a god
complex” George Mikes in his article “Professional Deformities” writes as
under:
“It was not that Judges were, or are, Sadists. Very few of them are.
But sooner or later most of them develop a „God complex.‟ When everyone
keeps kowtowing to you; when people laugh at your silliest jokes and
listen to your most, trivial utterances though they were the Sermons on the
Mount; when the outcome of quarrels and arguments, and often the fates
of men, and women and their children rest in your hands; when you
cannot be sacked from your job, however, incompetent or senile you
become ..… when, in other words you are treated like God, then it is
difficult not to believe in your own divinity. You are addressed as “My
Lord”, almost like Him, so naturally you are inclined to believe. He is your
colleague. ”
Concluding Remarks:
I conclude this note by reiterating the words of former Chief Justice
Hon‟ble Justice Y.V Sabharwar as under:
Much has been said about the need for a Code of Ethics for the
judiciary at various points of time. Question arises as to what is the
necessity of reiterating the principles which are known to all of us. I would
answer it this way. The principles may be known to us. But with all
democratic institutions facing the crisis of credibility in the fast changing
socio-economic norms, there is always a need to keep reminding ourselves
of the Code of Conduct the judiciary is expected to follow. These
principles, if reiterated time and again, would hopefully get ingrained in
7 (1987) 3 SCC 1.
8
the minds of young judges so that what is expected of them becomes their
second nature. The reiteration is also required so that the public at large, in
general, and the legal fraternity, in particular, are also wary and do not
allow, or lead, those on the Bench into going astray8.
8Lecture by Hon’ble Justice Y.V Sabharwar, Former Chief Justice of Inida on Canons of Judicial Ethics.
1
JUDICIAL ETHICS
1. After attaining independence, the people of India adopted and chose
for themselves a democratic form of Government. Like any other modern
democratic polity, the system in our country is also divided into three
organs, viz. Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. The Constitution divides
the powers amongst these three organs and makes them independent of
each other, yet creating a system of checks and balances. The role assigned
to the judiciary is of utmost importance. This organ is vested with the duty
to uphold the Constitution and guarantee that the rule of law envisaged in
our Constitution will always prevail. In order to ensure that the judiciary is
able to discharge this onerous responsibility, the concept of independence of
the judiciary was planted into the Constitution as one of its basic structures,
tinkering with which is taboo.
2. The concept of independence of Judiciary was the cause of concern of
the Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India [1981
(Suppl.) SCC 87], and the Court observed thus: “The concept of
independence of the judiciary is a noble concept which inspires the
constitutional scheme and constitutes the foundation on which rests the
edifice of our democratic polity. If there is one principle which runs through
the entire fabric of the Constitution, it is the principle of the Rule of Law and
under the Constitution, it is the judiciary which is entrusted with the task of
keeping every organ of the State within the limits of the law and thereby
making the Rule of Law meaningful and effective. It is to aid the judiciary in
this task that the power of judicial review has been conferred upon the
judiciary and it is by exercising this power which constitutes one of the most
potent weapons in armory of the law, that the judiciary seeks to protect the
citizen against violation of his constitutional or legal rights or misuse or
abuse of power by the State or its officers.” The Judges thus are a privileged
class and vested with duties of great responsibility, holding offices of public
trust. It has been often said that the duty of a Judge is a divine duty. The
concept of rule of law is dependent on an independent, fair and competent
judiciary since Judges are, to borrow words from the Preamble of Model
Code of Judicial Conduct adopted by American Bar Association in 1990
“arbiters of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly
visible symbol of Government under the rule of law”. When we talk of
ethics, we mean moral principles that have evolved to keep us on the path
2
of virtue or, to put it simply, morally correct. When we use the word
“canon”, it refers to principles of morality that are regarded as very lofty.
3. Almost every public servant is governed by certain basic Code of
Conduct which includes expectation that he shall maintain absolute integrity;
devotion to duty; do nothing which is unbecoming of a public office held by
him; render his best judgment in the performance of his official duties; be
prompt and courteous; not involve himself in acts of moral turpitude; not
take part in party politics; not be associated with activities that are pre-
judicial to the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public
order; not to engage himself in interviews with media, except with the lawful
authority of his superiors; not divulge official information which has been
entrusted to him in confidence; not accept pecuniary advantage, in
particular, from those with whom he is involved in official duties; not to
engage himself in private trade or business while holding public office; not to
indulge in alcoholism or gambling; to manage his financial affairs in such a
manner that he is always free from indebtedness and not to involve himself
in transactions relating to property with persons having official dealings with
him. But then, these are general principles governing the Code of Conduct
for all public servants. The office of a Judge requires much more. The Code
of Ethics expected of those in the judiciary goes beyond the call of duty of an
ordinary public servant.
4. Much has been said down the ages about the code of ethics for the
judiciary. In more recent times, Indian judiciary ratified and adopted a
charter called “Re-statement of Values of Judicial Life” in the Chief Justices’
Conference in 1999. At the International level, Principles of Judicial Conduct
were approved and adopted in November 2002 in the Round-Table Meeting
of the Chief Justices from several law systems held in Peace Palace in
Hague, Netherlands. I do not intend this to be a compendium of all rules of
ethics for judges. I would be highlighting only those, which to my mind are
of prime importance. The people of India look up to the judiciary to
administer justice; justice that is fair; justice that is equal & even-handed;
and justice that is unpolluted. This expectation is of eternal value. The
principles of ethics that is the conduct of an ideal Judge arise out of what is
a legitimate well-entrenched right of the people for whom the judicial
institution has been created. It is the right of the people of India that the
courts will give them their due in the form of justice. The rules of ethics are
3
nothing but a corresponding sacred duty on the part of the Judges to live up
to those expectations. There are certain cardinal principles of judicial ethics
that apply to any person holding a judicial office whether at the level of
subordinate judiciary or in the highest court of the land. I would broadly
categorize these principles into three: one, concerning the acts attributable
to his official functions as a Judge; second, concerning his conduct while in
public glare; and third, the expectations of him during his private life.
Necessarily, most of these principles will overlap the three spheres of life of
a Judge.
5. The oath taken by the Judges at the time of taking over the judicial
offices reminds them of their responsibilities and sums up the subject at
hand truly, fully and effectually. It obliges them to be faithful to the
Constitution of India. They undertake that they shall uphold the
sovereignty & integrity of India and to truly and faithfully perform the
duties of their offices without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and in
doing so shall render judgment to the best of their ability and knowledge.
This in a way summarizes the code of ethics for those holding judicial offices.
The oath to uphold and be faithful to the Constitution binds the Judge to the
ethos and philosophy enshrined in the Constitution, the supreme law of the
land. Since the concept of equality before the law is one of the salient
features of the Constitution, it naturally implies that a Judge is expected to
always be fair and impartial in his judgment. It is an age-old adage, oft-
quoted in legal circles, that ”Justice is not only to be done but must be seen
to have been done”. The obligations arising from the above principle are
myriad. The Judge must be even-handed. His approach must be
consistent, irrespective of the fact as to who is before him in the dock. He
is to sit with open mind. This also means that he cannot act on pre-
conceived notions. He may have his own independent views and approach to
a given subject. But, in his judgment there can be no room for personal
idiosyncrasies. He is in the judgment seat in a fiduciary character. He has
to apply law as has been established and evolved. He can give a definite
direction to the law by adding his views to the debate on a particular issue,
keeping himself within the four corners of judicial propriety. His personal
whims or caprice can have no role to play in the discharge of his official
duties. It is his duty to apply the law as it exists rather than develop the law
anew every time a new person appears before him. There are certain well-
4
entrenched rules founded on principles of public policy which reflect as to
what is expected in the conduct of a Judge. These rules include the
following: -
i) Regard for the public welfare is the highest law (SALUS POPULI EST
SUPREMA LEX).
ii) No man shall be condemned unheard (AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM).
iii) No man can be judge in his own cause (NEMO DEBET ESSE JUDEX IN
PROPRIA SUA CAUSA).
iv) An act of the Court shall prejudice no man (ACTUS CURIAE NEMINEM
GRAVABIT).
6. These principles are fundamental rules in the administration of justice
and are based on rules of good sense and fair play. Some of these are
clubbed together to be categorized as rules of natural justice. A Judge
administers justice. In order to do justice, the first and foremost expectation
of him is to be just. In my view, this expectation itself is the fountain source
of all that can be put in the realm of canons of judicial ethics. His life must
be one open to probity. As a person, in order to be just, has to be morally
right, a Judge has also to be fair & impartial to all concerned. He cannot
have any pre-disposed state of mind. It is wrong to say that a person has
the power to be a Judge. It is rather his duty to judge and, seen in this light,
it is expected that his judgment would not be actuated by concerns of
private interests or considerations. He must hold the scales of justice evenly.
He has to be exact. He has to be merciful. He has to be decisive. He has
to be upright and resolute.
7. The above straight away takes us to the concerns about consistency.
A fair Judge will always be consistent in his approach to the appreciation of
facts and application of law to the facts found proved before him.
Inconsistencies in the judgment of an individual bring bad name to the
institution. They invite criticisms worded such as “Show me the face and I
will show you the law”. A Judge will always execute the duties of his office
diligently & faithfully. This broad proposition can be further divided into
several sub-mores. The notions of fairness and impartiality give rise to
certain special norms for Judges. These norms are designed so that he
remains independent and uninfluenced. His job is to hear the parties in the
open court. It is thus taboo for him to give a private audience to the
litigants or their lawyers. He has to shun social interactions with such
5
category of persons at all costs. The concept of courts functioning under the
public glare generally called “open court” is not an idle one. It is based on
the principle of transparency because that reinforces faith and confidence
of the public in the system. It is, therefore, a sacred duty of every Judge to
function in the open in discharge of his official duties. The judicial
procedure and practice are regulated by pre-set rules and norms. It is true
that procedural law is hand-maid of justice. But, at the same time, it is also
true that procedural law has been evolved on the basis of experience of last
several centuries. Each step of the procedure prescribed by the law has a
definite purpose and philosophy behind it. In order to do complete justice,
sometimes the Judge may have to shed the straitjacket of the procedure but
this cannot become a norm. Compliance with the procedure established
by law ensures that the litigants remain aware of the progress of the case in
the Court and would not be taken by surprise at any step of the way. The
judicial system in India faces the challenge of huge arrears. The figures of
pendency at all levels are staggering. It may sound clichéd to say that
“delayed justice” is “denied justice”. But, every litigant legitimately expects
quick justice. With the courts crushed under the weight of sheer numbers, it
is not easy to render quick justice. Need to expedite the wheels of justice in
each case continues to be of great relevance and importance. In order to
meet the lawful expectations of the people at large, it is imperative that
each Judge must be in full control & command of his court. This brings us
to another area of judicial ethics.
8. A Judge cannot be in command of his court unless he is fully
committed to the task assigned to him. It is expected from him that he
would not adopt the mentality of a menial clerk who works for certain fixed
hours of the day to earn his living. The office of Judge is not a service or
employment in the ordinary sense of the term. It is an office of public
service. A Judge remains a Judge hours a day, 7 days a week and 365 days
a year. He thinks about the cases on board even while he is asleep. In order
to show such commitment, a Judge must first cherish the solemn duty
he has undertaken. It naturally flows from the above that the Judge must
be studious, thorough, prepared and well conversant with the factual
or legal nuances of the litigation he is handling. This requires preparation
before the hearing so that the hearing is properly controlled. This also
requires calm & dispassionate disposition & study after the hearing. A
6
Judge who is alive to the contours of the case before him would never
permit unending cross-examination or infinite arguments. He would
always be in charge and full command of the proceedings in the Court and
keep the counsel on either side focused on the issues to be addressed. This
achieves several positive results. A Judge answering to these traits will have
a Cause List that utilizes his judicial time to the optimum. Such a Judge
would not like to sit idle and, therefore, shall ensure that he has requisite
number of cases lined up before him so as to remain pre-occupied
throughout the normal working hours. Speaking in the context of trial
Judges, a conscious Judge would always ensure that only relevant and
crucial witnesses in such number are called on each working day before him
as can be examined and thereafter discharged without being burdened with
the obligation to be called again and again. He would studiously protect
harassment of the litigants in general and witnesses in particular, by
unscrupulous elements. His proceedings will always ensure that the
procedure is strictly followed and each case makes the requisite progress, at
least to the extent of the step for which it was listed on any given date. All
this care & caution shown by a vigilant Judge would not only underscore
that he is a resolute man firmly in control, earning him good respect and
reputation in the public and the Bar but also facilitate expeditious
disposal of cases in his Court.
9. It naturally flows from the above that a Judge can never be
unjustifiably absent from duty. He has to be available & accessible to
the people at large who are expected to invoke his jurisdiction for redressal
of their grievances. In nutshell, a Judge has to be punctual & regular in
adhering to the court hours. The need for punctuality and regularity is not
only to have full control over the work but also to have a moral authority to
check indiscipline amongst those who are expected to play a role in the
functioning of the Court, including the court staff, members of the Bar, the
litigants, witnesses etc. Conversely put, and as a natural corollary, he would
not abdicate his duties or unconscionably refuse to use his jurisdiction to
do justice.
10. A Judge cannot create discipline in his Court unless he leads by
example. In this view, restraint and discipline are most important
attributes of an ideal Judge. Such a Judge would maintain dignity and
decorum in his Court; would not indulge in loose talk; would refrain from
7
unnecessary utterances and would keep his temper in check. Since he
would not himself indulge in intemperate language, he would not allow
anyone else to do so. It naturally inheres in this trait that such a Judge
would always be polite & considerate and imbued with a sense of
humility. He would not disturb the submissions of the lawyers midway only
to project a “know-all” image for himself. This also means that he would be
sitting with an open mind, eager to be advised by the counsel of the parties.
Any power in absence of accountability would turn into a tyranny. It is the
cardinal pre-requisite of democracy and rule of law that power is
accompanied by accountability. Judges can be accountable only by
demonstrating exemplary conduct and behaviour and showing a cultured
image. It is necessary, and it is my firm view, that judges must remain
humane and considerate. They have been vested with divine duties but
they would never attain divinity. They are mere agents of the superior power
that controls us to do justice between man and man. They have to bear in
mind the maxim “Do not do unto others what you would not have others do
unto you”. A humane Judge will always be just and merciful. He would
always remember that “mercy seasons justice”.
11. A just and humane Judge will always be non-partisan. He
would be above narrow considerations and not prone to external
influences. His judgment would be dispassionate. He would not identify
with the cause of a particular section of society. It naturally follows from this
that a Judge would always be aboveboard and demonstrate absolute
integrity not only in his Court but also in his private life outside the Court.
He would refrain from socializing unnecessarily not only with the persons
having official work in his Court but also generally with the society at large,
since there is no guarantee as to who could have a case coming in his Court
in the future. If his commitment to the job is sincere, he would virtually be
left with no time for social life beyond a point. A Judge need not be unsocial
as his personal life would involve his near and dear ones. Yet, he is expected
to be asocial, since his movement in any particular section of the society
might give rise to reasonable apprehensions in the minds of the litigants
about his independence. I now come to a touchy subject. The tendency to
invite judges for different seminars has increased over the last few years. If
the intentions were purely academic, this should be a welcome trend. But,
unfortunately the tribe of certain sections organizing seminars only to create
8
a pretext to invite certain judges for a small session of lectures or
discussions, followed by lavish hospitality, gives rise to anxiety as to
whether the motives were holy or otherwise. Personally speaking, I have
nothing against judges participating in academic seminars, workshops etc.
But this cannot become a regular routine. Judges cannot afford to make
themselves so accessible that they loose the aura of authority around them.
The position in the office of a Judge puts him on a high pedestal in the
temple of justice. Too much familiarity with those who frequently visit their
courts on official business slackens the authority and has the possibility of
breeding contempt.
12. Further, speaking from public platforms, may be on legal issues,
generates the possibility that the judges might end up publicly discussing
cases pending before them. This would not be healthy. This would create an
impression in the mind of the litigants involved in such a case that the Judge
is sitting with a pre-disposed mind. Even further, the issues of law that are
generally debated in the workshops, seminars or conferences are closely
interlinked with the political issues of the day. A Judge, in order to be
impartial, has to be apolitical. In his personal life, he may have certain
leanings towards a particular political philosophy. But those leanings cannot
reflect in his official exertion. A Judge must never get himself bracketed with
a particular political philosophy.
13. The concept of “due application of mind” involves a mental disposition
where the Judge is not only open to listen, comprehend and weigh in
balance the arguments advanced before him but is also open to
correction. Judges are also human beings, prone to frailties as any other
human would be. They also sometimes err. It is their bounden duty to be
always eager to review, if allowed in law, so that they could undo injustice, if
any, done at their hand or at least revise their view so that same mistake
would not recur; this, because repetition of error would be suspect as
intentional or motivated and therefore, unpardonable.
14. I talked of external influences. Every Judge in the course of his career
is subjected to tests by external influences. They could be in the form of
pressure tactics, threats, allurement etc. It is the times when such external
influences come into play that the true strength of the character of the
Judge comes to the fore. The duties of the Judge render him a person in
public service. He is thus a public property. There cannot, therefore, be
9
anything about his life which should remain hidden from public glare. His life
must be an open book. It flows from this that the assets and liabilities of
the Judge are known to one and all.
15. His financial or property transactions should have no nexus with
his official dealings. He must declare the same scrupulously and at no cost
should engage himself with anyone connected with his official duties.
Judges also deal with public money in the management of the Court. All
transactions involving public money by the Judges must necessarily be
strictly adhering to the financial rules so that he can be accountable. Any
deviation from the norms invites criticism putting a question mark on his
credibility and integrity which a Judge, in the larger interest of the public
confidence, can ill-afford.
16. Coming to the allurements, a Judge must train himself in the
beginning of his judicial career not to fall prey to offers of valuable gifts in
cash, kind or service from members of the general public. Hon’ble Mr.
Justice Krishna Iyer in his book “Law and the People” went to the extent of
observing thus:
“It must be said that the independence of judiciary which plays the
useful role in democratic societies in checking a class biased
Government is being undermined in our country, by such devices as
making judges, after retirement or on the eve of retirement,
governors, ambassadors, vice chancellors etc. These plums have a
seductive influence on superannuating gentlemen and should be
avoided, if we are purists regarding the independence of the
judiciary.”
17. A judge cannot afford to be accused of acts of moral turpitude. He
cannot indulge, in or outside his court, in such behavior as can create doubts
about the credibility of his character. His behavior has to be a model one.
Only then he would be able to command respect. Like it has been said:
“Caesar’s wife has also to be above suspicion”. The duty to remain within the
bounds of morality is not restricted to the Judge himself. He is to see to it
that members of his family, at least those who live with him also subscribe
to this philosophy. A scandalous behavior on the part of a Judge, even in his
private affairs, is bound to affect his image and prestige in the office of the
Judge.
(B.DEVENDRA REDDY)
Junior Civil Judge,
Madakasira,
Anantapuramu District.
NOTES ON
"CANNONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT,CHARACTER AND
INTEGRITY OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER”
Submitted by
Y.Nagaraja,
Junior Civil Judge,
Kalyandurg.
Indian Constitution is based on Rule of Law and the system of parliamentary
democracy. The essential requisite of political system is based on Rule of Law and
there should be Impartial Judiciary i.e. an independent body must be there to
decide whether the rule of law is being observed or not. That independent body is
the judiciary. Judicial officers perform duties without fear or favour; affection or ill-
will, in short judge must decide impartially. In order to render justice impartially
there should be certain principles for the judicial officer i.e. Judicial Ethics,
Conduct, Character and Integrity.
To perform duties impartially by a judicial officer must have “5-C's
and 4-P's”
i.Courtesy :- Patience, dignity and courtesy are essential attributes in court and
in chambers, a judge should always act courteously and respect the dignity of all
who have business there. A judge should also require similar courtesy from those
who appear before him or her, and from court staff and others subject to the
judge’s direction or control. Judge has to be courteous towards advocates who
appeared before court, be Polite with advocates while getting clarifications from
them, shall not force the advocates to give reply. A judge must not make improper
and insulting remarks about litigants, advocates.
//2//
ii. Character :- A judge should be above personal animosities, and must not
have favourites at the Bar. Unjustified reprimands of counsel, offensive remarks
about litigants or witnesses and intemperate behaviour by a judge undermines both
order and decorum in the court. When a judge intervenes, he or she should ensure
that impartiality, and the perception of impartiality, are not adversely affected by
the manner of the intervention. A judge has practice of aloofness, should not
accept costly Gifts and Hospitality from others.
iii.Commitment:- Dedicatation towards duties
iv.Courge :- The confidence to act according to law and rendering justice without
fear.
v. Conviction:- Firmly held belief or opinion
4-P's
i.Punctuality:- Adhering to Judicial time
ii.Probity:- Moral integrity and honesty, The inappropriate use of court
staff is an abuse of judicial authority that places the
employee in an extremely difficult situation. Court staff
should not be directed to perform inappropriate and
excessive personal services for a judge beyond minor matters
iii. Promptness:- Judgments should be delivered within time. Justice delayed
justice denied. If fails to deliver judgment intime it amounts
to great misconduct.
iv.Patience :- Anger management , be patient but not be too patience.
//3//
As per SUKRANEETHI:- A judge should be beyond
“Raga, Dwesha,Lobha and Bhyaya”
Raga: Favourisim to party
Dwesha: Doing unfavourism to hartred or haten party
Lobha: Greed, Which is root cause for all evils in the world.
It is mother of all evils.
Bhaya: Afraid, it is a great weakness of a person.
DECISIONS ON JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT,CHARACTER AND
INTEGRITY OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER
“JUDICIAL OFFICER CAN NOT HAVE TWO STANDARDS”
HELD in case of DAYA SHANKAR V/S HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, Reported in AIR 1987 SC 1469 “Judicial Officers cannot have two standards, one in the Court and another outside the Court.
They must have only one standard of rectitude and integrity. They cannot act even remotely
unworthy of the office they occupy.”
“Self intraspection”
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY V/S SHIRISH KUMAR
RANGRAO PATIL Reported in 1997(6)SCC 339
“....The lymph-nodes (cancerous cells) of corruption constantly keep creeping into the
vital veins of judiciary and the need to stem it out by judicial surgery lies on judiciary
itself by its self-imposed or corrective measures or disciplinary action under the doctrine
of control enshrined in Articles 235, 124(6) of the Constitution...”
//4//
Bangalore Principles of Judcial Ethics,2002
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct are a comprehensive statement of ethical
principles. By resolution 2006/23, the United Nations Economic and Social Council emphasized
that the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct “represent a further development and are
complementary to the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary”, and invited
Member States, “consistent with their domestic legal systems, to encourage their judiciaries to
take into account the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct when reviewing or developing
rules with respect to the professional and ethical conduct of members of the judiciary”.
WHEREAS the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes as fundamental the principle
that everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and
impartial tribunal, in the determination of rights and obligations and of any criminal charge.
WHEREAS the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees that all persons
shall be equal before the courts, and that in the determination of any criminal charge or of rights
and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled, without undue delay, to a fair and
public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
WHEREAS the foregoing fundamental principles and rights are also recognized or reflected in
regional human rights instruments, in domestic constitutional, statutory and common law, and in
judicial conventions and traditions.
WHEREAS the importance of a competent, independent and impartial judiciary to the protection
of human rights is given emphasis by the fact that the implementation of all the other rights
ultimately depends upon the proper administration of justice.
//5//
WHEREAS a competent, independent and impartial judiciary is likewise essential if the courts
are to fulfil their role in upholding constitutionalism and the rule of law.
WHEREAS public confidence in the judicial system and in the moral authority and integrity of
the judiciary is of the utmost importance in a modern democratic society.
WHEREAS it is essential that judges, individually and collectively, respect and honour judicial
office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in the judicial system.
WHEREAS the primary responsibility for the promotion and maintenance of high standards of
judicial conduct lies with the judiciary in each country.
AND WHEREAS the United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary are
designed to secure and promote the independence of the judiciary, and are addressed primarily
to States.
LEGAL PROVISIONS ON JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT,CHARACTER
AND INTEGRITY OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER:-
As per Article 39A of Indian constitution :-
The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis
of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or
schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to
any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
A.P.SERVICES CONDUCT SERVICE RULES 1964: applies for all Government
Servants including Judicial Officers:
As per Rule 3(1) :- Every Government employee shall be devoted to his duty and
shall maintain absolute integrity, discipline, impartiality and a sense of propriety.
//6//
As Per Rule 3(2):-No Government employee shall behave in a manner which is
unbecoming of such employee or derogatory to the prestige of Government.
Section 27 of A.P.CIVIL Courts Act: No Judicial Officer shall try suit if he is
interested or tried:
Section 27 Judicial officers not to try suits in which they are interested nor to try
appeals from decrees or orders passed by them in other capacities
(1) No judicial officer shall try any suit to which he is a party or in which he is
personally interested, nor he shall adjudicate upon any proceeding connected with,
or arising out of, such suit.
(2) No such officer shall try any appeal against a judgment, decree or order passed
by him in another capacity.
(3) Where any such suit, proceeding or appeal comes before any such officer, he
shall report the circumstances to the court to which he is immediately subordinate.
(4) The superior court shall thereupon dispose of the case in the manner provided
by Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.
(5) Nothing in sub-section (4) shall be deemed to affect the extraordinary original
civil Jurisdiction of the High Court.
Explanation :- In this section the expression 'Judicial Officer', includes any Judge
of the City Civil Court, any District Judge, any Senior Civil Judge and any Junior
Civil Judge .
//7//
Section 479 Cr.P.C :
479.Case in which Judge or Magistrate is personally interested.
No Judge or Magistrate shall, except with the permission of the Court to which an
appeal lies from his Court, try or commit for trial any case to or in which he is a
party, or personally interested, and no Judge or Magistrate shall hear an appeal
from any judgment or order passed or made by himself.
Explanation.-A Judge or Magistrate shall not be deemed to be a party to, or
personally interested in, any case by reason only that he is concerned therein in a
public capacity, or by reason only that he has viewed the place in which an offence
is alleged to have been committed or any
Section 352 Cr.P.C :
352. Certain Judges and Magistrates not to try certain offences when committed
before themselves. Except as provided in sections 344, 345, 349 and 350, no
Judge of a Criminal Court (other than a Judge of a High Court) or Magistrate shall
try any person for any offence referred to in section 195, when such offence is
committed before himself or in contempt of his authority, or is brought under his
notice as such Judge or Magistrate in the course of a judicial proceeding.
Conclusion:- In my opinion Judicial officers must be free from “Raga,
Dwesha,Lobha and Bhyaya”.
From To
Sri.Y.Nagaraja, The Hon’ble Principal District Judge,
Junior Civil Judge, A n a n t a p u r a m u.
Kalyandurg.
Dis.No. Dated:-01/09/2015
Honoured Sir,
Sub:- Workshops – Workshops to be conducted once in three months
to the Judicial Officers Notes on the topic of “ Cannons of Judicial
Ethics , Conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”-
Submitted – Regarding.
Ref:- 1. Letter of the Hon’ble High Court in ROC.No.5-WS/2015-RR,
dated:- 15-7-2015
2. Circular of Hon'ble District Court, Anantapuramu in Dis.No.4794,
Dated:-24-7-2015
3. Circular of Hon’ble District Court , Anantapuramu in
Dis.No.5082/2015/Admn./Genl. Dated:-5-8-2015.
=O=
In obedience to the subject and reference cited I am herewith submitting the Notes
on the topic of “ Cannons of Judicial Ethics , Conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”
for kind consideration.
Yours faithfully,
Junior Civil Judge,
Kalyandurg.
1
JUDGMENT WRITING IN GENERAL
1. Judgment is the process by which decisions are made on a dispute by the
competent organs having the power to entertain the case. That is to say a court
or judicial institutions having a jurisdiction will be able to see the case and
finally to make rulings to the matter and this decision is called judgment.
2. Judgment does not include only the action of pronouncing or orally
passing of decision but also the recording or writing down of that judgment is
also included. Therefore, judgment has two basic parts the process of giving or
making the judgment and also the step of writing the judgment. So, the matter
of judgment explores the issues including the basic task of making and writing
judgment.
3. Judgment writing having its own general view and relation with the
process of making judgment it is a wide concept which encompasses different
kinds of steps and rules.
4. The term judgment is defined by different scholars almost invariably, but
with the slight deviation. Judgment, as provided in P.H Collins Law Dictionary, is
simply defined as” the official decision given by a court of law” emphasis being
given to the body making it.
5. The term judgment is broadly defined in the Black's Law Dictionary as
"the official and authentic decision of a court of justice upon the respective
rights and claims of the parties to an action or suit therein litigated and
submitted to its determination. It is the final decision of the court resolving the
dispute and determining the rights and obligations of the parties. It can also be
defined as a decision or sentence of the law given by court of justice or other
competent tribunal as a result of proceedings instituted therein".
6. As such, according to the above definition, it is a determination of a court
of competent jurisdiction upon matters submitted to it, deciding the respective
rights and duties of the parties involved in the dispute.
7. On the basis of the above definitions, it can be safely concluded that
judgment has the following basic features:-
a) It should be a decision given on the basis of the law and pronounced publicly
(officially). Here, it should be remembered that a mere decision of a judicial
organ , after appreciating the case , can not be termed as judgment unless it is
officially declared in front of the parties litigating to each other and possibly the
larger public (court audience.)
2
b) It should be given after the litigating parties submit their case for
determination at the disposal of the body giving judgment. Here a note needs to
be taken that the judicial body should make sure that it is provided with a case
in its hand in order to render a judgment. In other words, the judicial body (or
its members) can not make judgments based on their personal knowledge,
unless the dispute is brought before them by either of the parties to the conflict
for disposition.
c) Judgment should also be given by the competent tribunal to dispose the
particular case before hand. Hence, a decision made by a body which lacks the
required legal authority to adjudicate the case can not be regarded as
judgment. As a result there will be no room for such kind of decisions to be
enforced. In simpler terms, decision given by an incompetent body can not have
binding nature at all over the subjects of the decision.
d) It should contain a determination as to the respective rights and duties of the
disputing parties. By having so, judgment is expected to bring an end to the
litigation of the parties at hand. In other words, it should reveal the winning and
the loosing party in the case. Unless a judgment manifests the favored and
disfavored party, then it is not a judgment at all.
e) Judgment is the final adjudication of a case. Once a judicial body gives
judgment over a certain case, it can not review the same case for the second
time. Thus, judgment should mark the final judicial act in terms of the body
which reviews the case unless the law authorizes the same body to review its
judgment for reason provided in the law.
8. Legal Research must include both the fact and the law. A list of the
material facts should be made. This can be done by underlining the notes taken
of the trial or the argument. The research should determine how the law is to be
applied to those facts. At this stage the preliminary conclusion made under the
prewriting stage may be changed .The issues, factual or legal, should be
concisely identified. The point of the discussion must be known before the writer
can attempt to answer it .The possible alternative solutions can then be listed.
This provides the working guide for the writing process.
Drafting can begin now .The judge should start by making a choice of the legal
precept to be followed. Then, an outline should be drawn organizing the
materials into a logical sequence. Some items that were considered necessary
to the pre-writing phase can be eliminated. Other items may be added .At this
3
stage, the goal is to articulate why the reasoning is correct, and how it supports
the conclusion being advanced. The writer’s main objective is to persuade the
reader that the result reached is the only logical way to dispose of this
particular case.
9. During the drafting phase, while focusing up on the facts and then the
law, new solution and ideas become readily available. Justification for one
conclusion may disappear while justification for another may be discovered.
Progressive reasoning may require several changes in the direction of the
writing. Drafting is peculiarly suitable for the exploration of ideas. It is the
vehicle used to examine alternatives in reasoning while offering a means for
testing that reasoning. Thus, flawed reasoning becomes immediately
discernible. When this happens, it may alter the entire course of the writing.
Such changes can be made easily during the drafting phase and are an
indication of a healthy approach to the judicial task of decision making. Drafting
gives the judge flexibility and permits changes before the actual writing beings.
The draft is now ready for revision and the actual writing may begin. Once the
draft is satisfactory, the sequence may be changed for an easier understanding.
An item that adds nothing to the discussion may be eliminated. Repetitions of
words, phrases, or ideas may be removed to shorten the writing as long as the
meaning remains clear. The original materials may be completely reorganized or
rewritten. Additionally, materials presented in one way may be more efficiently
presented in another. Any change that will aid understanding or readability
should be made.
10. Editing follows next. Once the revised draft has been produced, the
sentences may be restructured with a view to adding strength or more precise
meaning. Grammar, spelling and punctuation should be corrected. Form should
be checked for consistency in the use of capitalization, spellings, and
hyphenation. Missing letters words or phrases should be added. Redundant
information should be deleted. Over use of a word or phrase should be strike
out. An unintentional emphasis or deemphasize should be eliminated. The
logical development of the discussion and the flow of the reasoning should be
examined. Transitional sentences should be added to improve the reader’s
understanding. There should be consistency in the use of the same word to
refer to the same thing. Thus, editing produces the final draft, i.e., the
judgment. Once retyped, it should be proof read carefully. It should represent a
cohesive dialogue with a logical progression of ideas starting from the
4
beginning, proceeding through the reasoning process and concluding in the
disposition. In case of hand written judgments, which are prevalent especially in
countries like ours, the judge’s hand writing is also an important concern in
judgment writing.
11. Essential Elements of a written Judgment
Mention, as regards the possible content of written judgments has been made
at different levels in previous discussions in this material. It is also seen that
judgments to be written by a court could have different forms based on the
nature of the case, magnitude/seriousness of the case, the nature of the
litigation, the nature of the parties involved and so on. Consequently, it is true
that one may come across varying kinds of judgments in our legal systems.
However, it should be underlined that all written judgments exhibit some
common and essential features despite the fact that the nature of the
case/Litigation is different.
12. It is possible to sort out the following elements as an essential and
common feature to almost all kinds of written judgments. For the purpose of
convenience, let’s see written judgments by categorizing them broadly in to civil
judgments and criminal judgments.
Essential elements of civil written judgments:-
1. The name of the court giving the judgment and its bench.
2. Date and file number of the case.
3. Name of the judge(s) presiding over the bench.
4. Name of the parties involved in the case and their attorneys, if any
5. The judgment, Which should necessarily include:- − Summary of the case
− The issue(s) framed for determination.
− Mention as to the hearing of the parties and their evidences
− Mention as to analysis of facts, evidences and the relevant laws
− Application of the pertinent legal provision to the case.
− Decision of the court along with the reasons for making the decision.
13. The Decree which among other things should necessarily make mention
of the respective rights and duties of the parties involved in the case.
Essential elements of criminal written judgments:-
1. Name of the court giving the judgment and its bench.
5
2. Date and file number of the case
3. Name of the judge(s) presiding over the bench
4. Name of the parties, involved in the case usually the prosecution and the
person alleged to have committed an offence.
5. The judgment of the court – which should incorporate − The offence said to
have been committed
− Mention as to preliminary objections and plea of guilt on the part of the
accused.
− Hearing of evidences of the parties.
− Mention as to analysis of facts, evidences and relevant laws
− Decision of the court with respect to the guiltiness of the accused.
6. Comment of the parties as to penalty, provided that the accused is found
guilty of the crime he/she is charged with.
7. The penalty
8. The decree, usually as to how and by whom the judgment should be
executed
However, the reader should take heart that the above presented features of a
written judgment are only the basic and essential elements that even written
judgment, under normal circumstances, need to incorporate and not the only
elements that could be enshrined in all written judgments.
14. In the above discussion, an attempt has been made to deal with the basic
constitutional principles, substantive and procedural rules that need to be taken
in to account while writing a judgment. Moreover, the essential elements in
almost all written judgments are discovered. In connection to these, the
forthcoming section will try to investigate the judgments to be written by trial
courts, appellate courts and cassation division of supreme courts as a distinct
venue of adjudication.
15. As has been repeatedly said, the task of judgment writing is not only a
purposeful undertaking but also is a task requiring some rules to be followed in
conducting it. Judgment writing has its own rules. The rules that should be
observed while writing judgments may govern the nature, purpose, content,
and structure of the overall judgment to be written.
6
16. FEATURES OF GOOD AND BAD WRITTREN JUDGMENTS
The main features and attributes of good and bad judgments, among others,
can be expressed in terms of the following standards:-
1. Clarity: - judgments need to be written in clear and precise manner so that
one who reads them can easily understand. In order for a judgment to be taken
as a good one, it ought to be written in a clear and precise language. As such,
as far as possible technical/professional terms should be avoided or substituted
by other simple and clear equivalent terms in meaning the message is likely to
be clear, In other words, good judgments are expected to avoid the usage of
jargons and long sentences. In line with this, it avoids sarcasm, proverbs,
colloquialism or slang (informal) language as it may affect the court decorum.
2. Comprehensiveness: - if written judgments are to convey the fullest
message in connection to the case, to the judgment audience, they should be
comprehensive in the sense that they included all necessary things/parts in
relations to the over all nature of the case, the court proceeding conducted, the
decision of the court along with its reasoning and the decree as to how the
judgment should be executed.
3. Relevancy and Irrelevancy of Facts; Evidence and Law :- all good
judgments should not include all material facts, evidences and related laws in
the written form for the sake of comprehensiveness or should not leave out
necessary facts and evidences from mentioning them for the sake of
conciseness and preciseness. But, should employ the standard of relevancy to
these and identify and incorporate in the written judgment only those relevant
to the determination of the case/dispute before hand. Hence, good written
judgments usually manage to avoid citing irrelevant law to the case or
explaining writing irrelevant facts and evidences.
4. Logical progression coherence: - good written judgments can also be
characterized by the coherence and consistency of ideas it provides to the
readers. If the written judgment is presented in a manner which lacks some
kind of flow impeding the reader from grasping the correct story of the case,
then it can not be categorized as good written judgment.
5. Organizational structure: - judgments when reduced in to writing should
be structurally organized in a manner that they could be easily understood on
the part of the judgment audience. Good judgments usually begin with
introducing the overall court proceedings and then it comes to an end by
7
providing the decision of the court and its reasoning. Thus, written judgments
which failed to present the judgment audience with the appropriate structural
organization of the overall disposition of the case can not be categorized as
good written judgment.
6. Citing documents evidences and laws:-if documents which have
evidentiary value needed to be embodied in the written judgment, the
document should be accurately cited including the date it was written, the
person(s) or authority who wrote it and the number, if any, and the type of the
document. If there arises a need also to incorporate any written work, the rules
pertaining to citation should be used in the written judgment. As such, it is only
when judgments accurately make reference to the materials or documents or
laws that the written judgment can be categorized as good one (in case of
making reference to laws too, this written judgment should clearly cite the
specific legal provision used along with the family of law the provision is found).
7. Missing Issue framing: - if judgments fail to incorporate the issue in the
written form it amounts to rendering decision without the existence of any
dispute between the parties to the case when in fact there is, no court case
without a dispute or issue.
Hence, good written judgments usually embody the issue in clear manner
and decide upon same at the end of the court proceeding.
8. Writing names of parties, witnesses & their titles: - It is also found to
be important for a written judgments to write the names of parties litigating,
the witnesses along with their titles properly and uniformly so that the decision
to be give on the bases of same could be relied on or to avoid confusion/
vagueness as to these names refer to. Good written judgments normally cite
the names of parties and witnesses clearly and uniformly in the body of
judgment by using formal and objective language.
9. Judgment on the basis of evidence/authority:- good written judgments
incorporate the decision of a court which is given only on the basis of a material
evidence as presented by the parties and in accordance with the letter and spirit
of the law, thereby avoiding the use of personal knowledge of the judge(s).
10. Hypothetical cases:- using hypothetical cases while writing judgments are
characteristic features of bad written judgments. Hence it is advisable not to
use hypothetical examples or discussions in writing judgments as it may open
8
doubts in interpretation, usually judges use hypothetical cases or examples for
the purpose of explanation.
11. Balance: - good written judgments are expected to be objective and not
subjective. It should not reflect internal display of sentiments and emotions of
the writing judge. The judge neither rewards virtues nor chastises vice. Hence,
the judge should administer even-handed justice being impartial whether the
parties may be private vs. government, rich vs. poor literate vs., illiterate,
official vs., ordinary person etc. A judge gives judgment using only facts,
evidences and the law.
12. Laconic Judgments: - these are judgments written in a short manner to
the effect that the judgments lack important facts so as to understand the case.
Such kind of judgments may need to refer other materials to have a clear
picture of the case. It may lack also clarity to all judgment audiences including
to the parties as well as to the appellate courts .Good judgments usually avoid
such kind of problems while writing the judgments
13. Lopsidedness: - Good judgments are always those which manifest that
equivalent attention and place to both or all party's argument in discussing their
points in decision making and judgment writing is given by the court/judge(s).
Normally, the judge is not expected to unnecessarily emphasize or deemphasize
either of the parties' facts, evidences and arguments .However, this should not
be construed to mean that the court may not finally favor the argument of one
of the parties in disposing the case or determining the out come of the case.
14. Language to be sober and temperate: - It is important also to use sober
and temperate words while writing judgments so that the written judgment can
be categorized as a good one. The language used in writing judgments should
not be hard that emphasized or deemphasized or should not be discriminating,
defamatory or that could affect feeling of the parties involved in the case in
particular and the larger public in general.
15. Judgment is not substitute of the file:- in principle written judgments
should be short and provided in clear manner. A judgment is not expected
normally to incorporate every proceedings conducted in side the court room.
Rather, it should be short, precise presenting summary of the file, written in the
judge's own words. As such, good written judgments are usually short but
comprehensive in the sense that it has the capacity to convey the reader the
whole matter embodied in the case.
9
16. Acronyms or abbreviations: - a good written judgment usually never
uses abbreviations. Judgment when reduced to writing, it becomes a public as
well as a historical document that will serve the future generation besides being
a mere document which brings an amicable solution to the parties in the
dispute. Abbreviations normally create ambiguity, hence the writing judge
should avoid the usage of abbreviations, however, if there is a need to use
abbreviations, the proper and full meaning of the abbreviation used must be
provided in the written judgment.
17. Remarks to be based on evidences: - good written judgment usually
manifest the fact that the court has taken cognizance of some important
remarks to be used in the proceedings of a case as well as in the judicial writing
in connection to evidences. For example in criminal cases the judge should give
concern to what is called the principle of "presumption of innocence unless
proved guilty". Thus, the judge should avoid the usage of words that reflect the
guiltiness of the accused/suspect before rendition of judgment/. The same is
true in civil cases with respect to words imposing liability on parties before
decision is reached at by the court to that effect.
18. Excitability:-beyond and above all things written judgments can be
categorized as good or bad in relation to the problem they could pose by the
time of execution. Good judgments are those having a conclusion provided in
clear and concise terms leaving a fertile ground for an easy execution.
On the part of the reader, however, it should be noted that the
parameters listed above, which are used to differentiate good written judgments
from bad written judgments are not exhaustive. Other standards which may be
helpful in making the distinction could exist though they are not included in the
above list.
(B.DEVENDRA REDDY)
Junior Civil Judge,
Madakasira. Anantapuramu District.
NOTES ON THE TOPIC OF CANNONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT, CHARACTER
AND INTEGRITY OF JUDICIAL OFFICER
A model code of judicial conduct:-
Canon:-1
A Judge shall of hold and promote the Independence, integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary,
and shall avoid impropriety the appearance of impropriety,
(a) compliance with the law,
(b) promoting confidence in the Judiciary,
(c) Avoiding abuse of prestige of Judicial office,
Canon-2:-
A Judge shall perform the duties of Judicial office impartially, competently, and diligently.
(a) A Judge shall act at all times in a manner that promote public confidence in the independence,
integrity, and impartiality of the Judiciary and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety,
(b) A Judge shall comply with law including Judicial conduct (c) A Judge shall not abuse the
prestige of the judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the Judge or others, or
allow others to do so.
Canon-3:-
A Judge shall conduct judge's personal and extra Judicial activities to minimize the risk of
conflict with obligation of judicial office.
Canon:-4
A Judge or candidate for Judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is
inconsistent with the, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary .
Code of Judicial Conduct:- (for the state of Florida)
1) A Judge shall uphold the integrity and Independence of Judiciary
2) A judge shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of impropriety in all
of the Judge's Activities
3) A Judge shall Perform the Duties of Judicial office Impartially and diligently.
4) A Judge is Encouraged to Engage in Activities to prove the law, the legal
system and the Administration of Justice.
5) A Judge shall Regulate Extra judicial activities to Minimize the risk of
conflict in Judicial duties.
//2//
6) Fiscal Matters of Judge shall be conducted in a manner that does not give
the appearance of the influence or impropriety, etc.,
7) A Judge or candidate for judicial office shall refrain from inappropriate
political activity.
Code of Judicial conduct
Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent Judiciary will
interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of
justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all sections of this Code of Judicial Conduct are the precepts that
Judges, individually and collectively, must respect and Honor the judicial office as a public trust and
strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. The judge is an arbiter of facts and law for
the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of Government under the rule of law.
The Code of Judicial conduct is not intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges.
They should also be governed in their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards. The
code is intended, however, to state basic standards which should govern the conduct of all judges and to
provide guidance to assist judges in establishing and maintaining high standards of judicial and personal
conduct.
1. Upholding the integrity and Independence of the Judiciary:-
An independent and Honorable Judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A Judge
should participated in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct , and should
personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary is preserved.
The provisions of this code are to be construed and applied to further the objective.
2: Avoiding Impropriety and the Appearance of impropriety in all of the Judge's Activities:-
A. A Judge shall comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public
confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary.
B. A Judge shall not allow any relationship to influence judicial conduct or judgment. A judge shall
not lend the prestige of Judicial office to advance the private interest of the judge or others; nor shall a
judge convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the
judge. A Judge shall not testify Voluntarily as a character witness.
C. A Judge shall not knowingly hold membership in any organization that practices discrimination
prohibited by law.
//3//
Canon.3:- Performing the Duties of Judicial office impartially and diligently:-
A. Judicial duties in General:- The Judicial duties of a Judge take precedence over all the Judge's
other activities. Judicial duties include all the duties of the Judge's office prescribed by law. In the
performance of these duties, the following standards apply;
B. Adjudicative Responsibilities.
(1) A Judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the Judge except those in which
disqualification is required or refusal is appropriate.
(2) A Judge should be faithful to the law and shall maintain professional competence in it. A judge
shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.
(3) A Judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the Judge.
(4) A Judge shall be pa0tient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, Witnesses, lawyers and
others with whom the Judge deals in an official capacity, and should require similar conduct of lawyers,
and of staff, court officials and others subject to the Judge's direction and control.
(5) A Judge shall perform Judicial duties without bias or prejudice.
(6) A Judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties , by words or conduct manifest bias or
prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin,
disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not knowingly permit staff, court
officials and others subject to the Judge's direction and control to do so.
(7) A Judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting, by
words or conduct, bias or prejudice based on race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual
orientation or socioeconomic status against parties, Witnesses, counsel or others. This requirement does
not preclude legitimate advocacy when any of these factors is an issue in the proceeding.
(8) A Judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's
lawyer, the right to be heard according to law. A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte
communications or other communications made to the Judge outside the presence of the parties between
the Judge and a party, an attorney, a guardian or attorney ad item, an alternative dispute resolution neutral,
or any other court appointee concerning the merits of a pending or impending judicial proceeding. A
Judge shall require compliance with
//4//
this subsection by court personnel subject to the Judge's direction and control. This subsection does not
prohibit.
(a) Communications concerning uncontested administrative or uncontested procedural matters;
(b) Conferring separately with the parties and or their lawyers in an effort to mediate or settle
matters, provided, however, that the Judge shall first give notice to all parties and not thereafter hear any
contested matters between the parties except with the consent of all parties;
(c) Obtaining the advice of a disinterested expart on the law applicable to a proceeding before the
judge if the Judge gives notice to the parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice, and
affords the parties reasonable opportunity to respond;
(d) consulting with other judges or with court personnel;
(e) Considering an ex parte communication expressly authorized by law.
(9) A Judge should dispose of all Judicial matters promptly, efficiently and fairly.
(10) A Judge shall abstain from public comment about a pending or impending proceeding which may
come before the Judge's court in a manner which suggests to a reasonable person the Judge probable
decision on any particular case. This prohibition applies to any candidate for judicial office. With respect
to judicial proceedings pending or impending in the court on which the candidate would serve if elected.
A Judge shall require similar abstention on the part of Court personnel subject to the Judge's direction
and control. This section does not prohibit Judges from making public statement in the course of their
official duties or from explaining for public information the procedures of the court. This section does not
apply to proceedings in which the judge or judicial candidate is a litigant in a personal capacity.
(11) A Judge shall not disclose or use, for any purpose unrelated to judicial duties, nonpublic
information acquired in a Judicial capacity. The discussions, votes, positions taken, and Writing of
appellate judges and court personnel about causes are confidences of the court and shall be revealed only
through a Court's Judgment, a written opinion or in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines for a court
approved history project.
C. Administrative Responsibilities:-
(1) A Judge should diligently and promptly discharge the Judge's administrative responsibilities
without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in Judicial administration and should
cooperate with other Judges and court officials in the administration of Court business.
//5//
(2) A Judge should require staff court officials and others subject to the Judge's direction and control
to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the Judge and to refrain from manifesting
bias or prejudice in the performance of their official duties.
(3) A Judge with supervisory authority for the Judicial performance of other judges should take
reasonable measure to assure the prompt disposition of matters before them and the proper performance
of their other judicial responsibilities.
(4) A Judge shall not make unnecessary appointments. A Judge shall exercise the power of
appointment impartially and on the basis of merit. A Judge shall avoid nepotism and favoritism. A Judge
shall not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.
(5) A Judge shall not fail to comply with Rule 12 of the Rules of Judicial Administration knowing
that the failure to comply is in violation of the rule.
D. Disciplinary Responsibilities:-
(1) A Judge who receives information clearly establishing that another judge has committed a
violation of this code should take appropriate action. A Judge having knowledge that another judge has
committed a violation of this code that raises a substantial question as to the other judge's fitness for
office shall inform the State Commission on judicial Conduct or take other appropriate action.
(2) A Judge who receives information clearly establishing that a lawyer has committed a violation of
the Taxes Disciplinary Rules of Professional conduct should take appropriate action. A Judge having
knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Taxes Disciplinary Rules of Professional
conduct that that raise a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a
lawyer in other respects shall inform the office of the general Counsel of the state bar of Texas or take
other appropriate action.
Cannon 4:- Conducting the Judge's Extra -Judicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of Conflict with
Judicial Obligations:-
A Judge shall conduct all of the Judge's extra-Judicial activities so that they do not:
(1) Cast reasonable doubt on the Judge's capacity to act impartially as a Judge;
or
(2) Interfere with the proper performance of Judicial duties.
B. Activities to Improve the Law:- A Judge may;
(1) Speak. Write. Lecture, teach and participate in extra -Judicial activities concerning the law, the
legal system, the administration of justice and non-legal subjects. Subject to the requirements of this
code; and
//6//
(2) Serve as a member, officer, or director of an organization or Governmental agency devoted to the
improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. A Judge may assist such an
organization in raising funds and may participate in their management and investment, but should not
personally participate in public fund raising activities. He or she may make recommendations, to public
and private fund-granting agencies on projects and programs considering the law, the legal system and the
administration of justice.
C. Civic or Charitable Activities:- A Judge may participate in civic and charitable activities that do
not reflect adversely upon the Judge's impartiality or interfere with the performance of Judicial duties. A
Judge may serve as an officer, director, trustee or non-legal advisor of an educational, religious,
charitable, fraternal, or civic organization not conducted for the profit of its members, subject to the
following limitations:
(1) A Judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will be engaged in proceedings that
would ordinarily come before the Judge or will be regularly or frequently engaged in adversary
proceedings in any Court.
(2) A Judge shall not solicit funds for any educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic
organization, but may be listed as an officer, director, delegate, or trustee of such an organization, and
may be a speaker or a guest of Honor at an organization's fund raising events.
(3) A Judge should not give investment advise to such an organization, but may serve on its board of
directors or trustees even though it has the responsibility for approving investment decisions.
D. Financial Activities.
(1) A Judge shall refrain from financial and business dealings that end to reflect adversely on the
Judge's impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of the judicial duties, exploit his or her judicial
position, or involve the judge in frequent transactions with lawyers or persons likely to come before the
court on which the Judge serves. This limitation does no prohibit either a Judge or candidate from
soliciting funds for appropriate campaign or officeholder expenses as permitted by state law.
(2) Subject to the requirements of subsection (1), a Judge may hold and manage investments,
including real estate, and engage in other remunerative activity including the operation of a business. A
Judge shall not be an officer, director or manager of a publicly owner business. For purposes of this
Canon, a “Publicly owned business” is a business having more than ten owners who are not related to the
Judge by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree of relationship.
//7//
(3) A Judge should manage any investments and other economic interest to minimize the number of
cases in which the Judge is disqualified. As soon as the Judge can do so without serious financial
detriment, the judge should divest himself or herself of investments and other economic interests that
might require frequent disqualification. A Judge shall be informed about the Judge's personal and
fiduciary economic interests, ad make a reasonable effort to be informed about the personal economic
interests of any family member residing in the Judge's household.
(4) Neither a Judge nor a family member residing n the Judge's household shall accept a gift,
bequest, favor, or loan from anyone except as follows:
(a) A Judge may accept a gift incident to a public testimonial to the judge; books and other resource
materials supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or an invitation to the Judge
and spouse to attend a Bar-related function or activity devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal
system , or the administration of Justice;
(b) A Judge or a family member residing in the Judge's household may accept ordinary social
hospitality; a gift, bequest, favour or loan from a relative; a gift from a friend for a special occasion such
as a wedding, engagement, anniversary, or birthday, if the gift is fairly commensurate with the occasions
and the relationship; a loan from a lending institution in its regular course of business on the same terms
generally available to persons who are not judges; or a scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same
terms applied to other applicants;
(c) A Judge or a family members residing n the Judge's household may accept any other gift, bequest,
favor or loan only if the donor is not a party or person whose interest have come or are likely to come
before the Judge;
(d) A gift , award or benefit incident to the business, profession or other separate activity of a spouse
or other family member residing in the Judge's household, including gifts, awards and benefits for the use
of both the spouse or other family member and the judge (as spouse or family member). Provided the
gift, award or benefit could not reasonably be perceived as intended to influence the Judge in the
performances of Judicial duties.
E. Fiduciary Activities.
(1) A Judge shall not serve as executor, administrator or other personal Representative, trustee,
guardian, attorney in fact or other fiduciary, except for the estate, trust or person of a member of the
judge's family , and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial
duties.
//8//
(2) A Judge shall not serve as a fiduciary if it is likely that the judge as a fiduciary will be engaged in
proceedings that would ordinary come before the Judge, or if the estate, truest, or ward becomes involved
in adversary proceedings in the court on which the Judge serve or one under its appellate jurisdiction.
(3) The same restrictions on financial activities that apply to a Judge personally also apply to the
judge while acting in a fiduciary capacity.
F. Service as Arbitrator or Mediator:- An active full-time judge shall not act as an arbitrator or
mediator for compensation outside the judicial system, but a Judge may encourage settlement n the
performance of officials duties.
G. Practice of Law:- A Judge shall not practice law except as permitted by statue or this code.
Notwithstanding this prohibition, a Judge may act prose and may, without compensation, give legal
advice to and draft or review documents for a member of the Judge's family.
H. Extra-Judicial Appointments: Except as otherwise provided by constitution and statue, a Judge
should not accept appointment to a Governmental committee, commission, or other position that is
concerned with issues of fact or policy on matters other than the improvement of the law, the legal
system, or the administration of justice. A Judge, however, may represent his or her country, state, or
locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational , and cultural activities.
Character and integrity of Judicial officer:-
The late chief Justice Bora Laskin listed a number of qualities which he felt were essential to being a
good judge - character; integrity; honesty; industry; life experience, which can include politics; flexibility
of mind; knowledge of the law; willingness to lister - but indicated that not all were easily ascertainable
in advance, and some “must be taken on expectancy”. (6)
An empirical study of Alberta Judges conducted by P.McCormick and I. Greene shows that
knowledge of the law was not at the top of the list of desirable qualities identified by the judges
themselves. McCormick and Greene asked judges, from the Provincial Court to the Court of Appeal,
what characteristics they though made good judges. The top seven must mentioned qualities in order of
frequency were as follows.
1. Industry , diligence
2. Courtesy
3. empathy
4. Patience
5. Knowledge of the law
6. Intelligence
7. Sense of fair play
//9//
These judges esteemed humanity, patience and courtesy at roughly the same level as knowledge
of the law or intelligence, Equally interesting were some of the qualities that were mentioned only once
or twice; independence and objectivity. It is ironic to note that text writers and judicial councils tell us
this is the very essence of being a Judge. This clashes with the Judicial self-assessment of the qualities
required for good judging. Yet the traditional version of the judge continues to dominate the republic's
perception. It is necessary to expose these myths if express code of conduct are to be accepted.
One of the burdens of being a Judge is that one is expected to rise above mere mortal status and
dispense justice with an objectivity that borders on the divine. Independent from the pressures of
everyday life and free of political influences, the Judge is to resolve difficult legal disputes with the
wisdom of a Solomon. This is the ideali9zed version of the Judge and is at best something to aspire to. It
tends to obscure the human dimensions of the practical task of Judging.
I conclude by reminding you that the law has two faces. It is, firstly, a practical craft and one
whose texture is highly technical and precise. It is, secondly, a human process whose polar star is the
protection and development of human dignity.
Given the high expectations that we have for judges, it is little wonder that we forget that they are
human beings with the attendant strengths and weaknesses. Judges should aspire to objectivity but they
cannot avoid being shaped by their background and life experiences.
The element of objectivity clearly distinguishes the judiciary from the other branches of
Government and makes its members the logical choice to chair a Government commission Judges are
prized for their impartiality and willingness to listen to all sides of an argument with an open mind,.
Allegations of bias or partiality would be fatal to public confidence in the Judiciary, so cautious restraint
was seen as the best road to neutrality. Judges were also expected to stay away from the legislative or
police role or engage in it in a very limited way:
In spite of the judge's role as legislator, justice must be administered according to law, not according to
the Judge's individual sense of justice. The Judge's legislative competence is narrower than that of the
legislator, His/her role is to legislate between the gaps, to fill the open space in the law. Thus the rule of
law is maintained.
NOTES ON “CANNONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT, CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY
OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER”
POEM
HE IS INDEPENDENT Like his Institution and Country.
His family ranges in ranks from Countryside to Countrywide.
He takes support only from his Lord and his family.