Democracy not just about numbers: CJI Chandrachud
Democracy is not just about numbers, chief justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud has empahsised, underlining the foundational role that constitutional accountability plays in a democracy that transcends mere electoral majorities.
Democracy is not just about numbers, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud has emphasised, underlining the foundational role that constitutional accountability plays in a democracy that transcends mere electoral majorities.
In an address at the Bhutan Distinguished Speakers’ Forum/JSW Lecture Series on Wednesday evening, the CJI offered a comprehensive vision for judicial legitimacy that extends far beyond numerical majorities, as he spoke on the theme of “Judicial Legitimacy through Accessibility, Transparency, and Technology: The Indian Experience.”
“Democracy is not just about numbers...while popular majorities define who is in government, the task of ensuring democratic accountability is a wider constitutional project,” said justice Chandrachud as he pointed to the Supreme Court of India’s mandate to uphold this accountability, framing constitutionalism as a counterbalance to mere electoral majoritarianism.
Noting that constitutionalism goes hand in hand with democracy, the CJI said that the Supreme Court’s role in India is pivotal in maintaining this balance. “Constitutionalism is based on the desirability to be governed by the rule of law rather than arbitrary legal systems. Indian constitutionalism manifests itself in the wide-ranging powers of the Supreme Court. Described as one of the most powerful constitutional courts in the world, the Indian Supreme Court shoulders that much heavier an obligation towards the people of the country,” he added.
Read more: ‘I gave my fullest every day’: CJI reflects on 2-year tenure as retirement nears
The CJI further illustrated this by citing the role of the Indian top court in adjudicating issues such as the distribution of resources, which, while managed by the government, often come under judicial scrutiny to ensure fairness. “Judicial bodies are tasked with the responsibility of giving effect to constitutional equity. Our role is not to hold the resources, but to scrutinise their distribution to ensure it aligns with the constitutional guarantees of fairness and equality,” he explained.
A significant portion of CJI Chandrachud’s address focussed on the importance of public trust, which he said, is essential for any judicial institution to function effectively. He reflected on how this concept has guided the apex courts of India as well as Bhutan to act as an intermediary between the government and the people.
“We are responsible as apex courts of democratic countries to bolster public trust in the judiciaries of our countries,” he said, adding that it falls upon the apex courts to mediate both the state’s obligations toward citizens and the mutual rights of individuals within the society.
Public trust, according to CJI Chandrachud, is not only essential but foundational to the judiciary’s role in society. He said that this trust extends beyond mere obedience to court orders; it pertains to the public’s perception of the judiciary as a reliable, impartial, and accessible institution.
“Public trust is not only about the court’s legitimacy, that it is the court’s moral right to command obedience or allegiance. It is about the broader function of the courts as public-oriented institutions,” he underscored.
In a system where judges are appointed independently of public opinion, the CJI acknowledged that the judiciary’s autonomy from popular sentiment underpins its impartiality. However, this autonomy necessitates a careful commitment to transparency and accountability, ensuring that the public continues to perceive the judiciary as fair, just, and relevant. “While the Constitution and statutes are enacted in the name of the people, judges must apply the letter and spirit of the law with clinical detachment from popular morality,” he asserted.
Moving into the technological advancements shaping the Indian judiciary, the CJI shared insights on the transformative role of technology, particularly in enhancing judicial accessibility and transparency. He highlighted the E-Courts Project, launched in 2007 to streamline case filing and court proceedings, which has made significant strides toward digitising India’s justice delivery systems.
“We now have the facility of filing cases at the click of a button through our e-filing platform,” noted the judge, adding that digital case management has drastically reduced the need for physical paperwork and has increased efficiency.
The chief justice elaborated on the technological infrastructure supporting these initiatives, such as the case management system (CMS), the world’s largest open-source judicial database. The CMS sends automated updates on case progress via email and WhatsApp, keeping litigants informed and engaged in their legal journeys. “Our CMS not only helps cut costs significantly but also facilitates effective communication with litigants,” he said, illustrating the judiciary’s efforts to be both cost-effective and accessible.
Virtual courts and hybrid hearings have further extended accessibility, enabling participation from remote regions and accommodating individuals who may be otherwise physically constrained, the CJI said. During the Covid-19 lockdowns, he added, these tools proved invaluable, expanding access for pregnant women, elderly individuals, and people with disabilities. “Virtual courts have helped us overcome the massive geographical limitation faced by our litigants from smaller pockets of the country,” he remarked.
Stressing that transparency is a key ingredient in fostering public trust, he pointed out that the Supreme Court has embraced live-streaming of significant constitutional cases to increase public engagement. By broadcasting these proceedings on YouTube, the court invites the public to witness judicial deliberations firsthand, he added.
“Sunlight is not only the best disinfectant; it also begets public trust. It helps us keep our house in order, it serves as an internal check on the functioning of the courts across the country. It ensures that our institutions are better-managed and use their resources effectively. Measures such as live-streaming have helped foster internal efficiency, accountability and institutional stability,” the CJI said.
He acknowledged the notorious backlog in Indian courts, referring to the Hindi phrase “tareekh pe tareekh,” which describes the frustrations of delay. He recognised that while this remains a challenge, the top court is actively implementing solutions. Initiatives such as the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) and iJuris provide transparent data on case backlogs and infrastructure needs at district courts, enabling better resource allocation and more effective management.
The CJI underscored the importance of addressing not only the outcome of cases but the entire judicial journey for litigants. “Outcomes are rarer than process-stuck people in the courts. Thus, not only the constitutional outcomes but the constitutional journeys matter,” he reflected. By reducing barriers, simplifying procedures, and expanding technological access, the Supreme Court aims to make the judicial process more inclusive and fairer, he said.
The CJI concluded his address by reflecting on the shared constitutional journey of India and Bhutan, highlighting the transformative influence of Dr BR Ambedkar on Bhutan’s legal framework. He spoke with admiration for Bhutan’s swift adoption of e-litigation during the pandemic and expressed hope for continued cooperation between the two nations.