Topic : Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary—Ministries and Departments of the Government; pressure groups and formal/informal associations and their role in the Polity.
2. If the Indian judiciary wishes to remain a public governance institution, it must embrace some rules of public accountability, do you agree? Analyse amidst the recent incidences. (250 words)
Reference: Live Mint
Why the question:
The author in the article emphasizes on the fact that a judiciary that sees a role for itself in governance should also be accountable to the governed.
Key Demand of the question:
Discuss and analyse the importance of public accountability of the Judiciary to Indian judiciary and why it is quintessential for it to be a public governance institution.
Analyze – When asked to analyse, you have to examine methodically the structure or nature of the topic by separating it into component parts and present them as a whole in a summary.
Structure of the answer:
Define why the question has been asked, one can start with the recent case of Prashant Bhushan and the associated verdict of apex court.
The Supreme Court’s recent contempt judgment against Prashant Bhushan has again raised the question of what is considered legitimate criticism of India’s higher judiciary.
To start with one must first define the identity of the higher judiciary, and its new relationship with the public. Take hints from the article and justify in what way public accountability of the Judiciary is quintessential to its modus operandi of being a public governance system.
Conclude that such an institution demands a new set of checks and balances. A people’s court will naturally receive feedback, if not criticism, from the very people it claims to govern. If the Indian judiciary wishes to remain a public governance institution, it must embrace some rules of public accountability that it has long enforced on other institutions of governance in the country.