How does the refusal of CJI Gavai to accept any post after retirement impact the perception of judicial independence in India?

The independence of the judiciary is a fundamental pillar of democracy in India. Public trust in the judicial system is influenced by how judges conduct themselves during and after their tenure. When a Chief Justice of India (CJI), such as Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, declares that he will not accept any post after retirement, it has significant implications for the perception of judicial independence.

• Reinforces Judicial Impartiality: Such a decision helps assure the public that judicial decisions are not influenced by the expectation of future government appointments, strengthening confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.
• Reduces Perceived Conflicts of Interest: Refusal to accept post-retirement positions minimizes doubts about possible conflicts of interest, as judges are not seen as making judgments to please the executive for future benefits.
• Sets a Positive Precedent: It sets a benchmark for other judges, encouraging a culture where judicial officers prioritize institutional integrity over personal gain.
• Enhances Public Trust: The public is more likely to trust a judiciary that is seen as independent and not beholden to the executive or legislature for post-retirement roles.
• Addresses Criticism: There has been criticism in the past about retired judges accepting government positions soon after retirement, which can create suspicion about their neutrality. Such refusals help address these concerns.