U.N.Treaties + Indian Judgments..-CJ & Collegium Supremacy
[Blog of Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar=  https://sites.google.com/site/justdvskumar  ]

Principles of Judicial Conduct

  1. Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary : 13 December 1985: In words
  2. Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct
  3. In Words: “‘Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct’ = ‘Strengthening basic principles of judicial conduct’ “: ECOSOC 2006/23
  4. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors
  5. Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (ECOSOC 2006/23)
  6. Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials
  7. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power
  8.   Strengthening basic principles of Judicial Conduct
  9.   Principles of Conduct for Court Personnel 
  10. United Nations Convention against Corruption [Wikipedia] The relevance of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct in strengthening  judicial integrity is now underscored in the United Nations Convention Against  Corruption. Article 11(1) of that Convention provides that:  “ Bearing in mind the independence of the judiciary and its crucial role in combating  corruption, each State party shall, in accordance with the fundamental principles of its legal system and without prejudice to judicial independence, take measures to strengthen integrity and to prevent opportunities for corruption among members of the judiciary. Such measures  may include rules with respect to the conduct of members of the judiciary. [13 =  13:  ECOSOC Resolution 2007/22 requested the Secretariat “to submit the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct and the Commentary on the Bangalore Principles to the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption at its second session”
    4.2 Preventive Measures (Chapter II, Articles 5–14)
  11. Commentary on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct
  12.   Measures for the Effective Implementation of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 
  13.   Dissemination Measures for Implementation of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct
  14. The Istanbul Declaration on Transparency in the Judicial Process :- Conference of Chief Justices and Senior Justices of the Asian Region . Istanbul, 20-21 November 2013

International Human Rights Treaties

  1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948
  2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966
  3. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966
  4. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006

7]  Reports of JIG Meetings (all documents are in English)
a] Report of the First Meeting, Vienna, 2000 pdf
b] Report of the Second Meeting, Bangalore, 2001 pdf
c]  Report of Round-Table Meeting, The Hague, 2002 pdf
d] Report of the Third Meeting, Colombo, 2003 pdf
e] Report of the Fourth Meeting, Vienna, 2005 pdf
f] Report of the Fifth Meeting, Vienna, 2007 pdf
g] Report of the Sixth Meeting, Lusaka, 2010 pdf
Pictures of the Meetings can be found here

History of the Group: History of the Group 2000-2011 (Engl.) pdf

U.N. Secretary General Letter On Rule Of Law. 9th May 2012

World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick Remarks for International Corruption Hunters Alliance December 7, 2010

Representation for Transparency & Accountability in Bench & Bar: Against CJI Kapadia & CJI-To-Be Altamas Kabir: Complaint to Prime Minster of India by Supreme Court Advocate with Evidences ! ? [ Click Here ].    For More:- Confederation of Indian Bar   Photo Gallery
About CIB Memorandum Members Registration Form Conferences
Executive Commitee & Founder Members
From the Organising Committee    Conference Secretariat & Registration   Contact
……..  Indian Judgments..-CJ & Collegium Supremacy  ……

  1. Three Judges Cases: The Supreme Court of India‘s collegium system, which appoints judges to the nation’s constitutional courts, has its genesis in three of its own judgments which are collectively known as the Three Judges Cases. [A] S. P. Gupta v. Union of India[1]  . [B] Supreme Court Advocates-on Record Association vs Union of India[2]. [C] In re Special Reference 1 of 1998[3]
  2. Over the course of the three cases, the court evolved the principle of judicial independence to mean that no other branch of the state – including the legislature and the executive – would have any say in the appointment of judges. The court then created the collegium system, which has been in use since the judgment in the Second Judges Case was issued in 1993. There is no mention of the collegium in the Constitution of India. Although the creation of the collegium system was viewed as controversial by legal scholars and jurists outside India, her citizens, and notably, Parliament and the executive, have done little to replace it. In January 2013, the court dismissed a public interest litigation that sought to challenge its collegium system of appointment.[4]    
    1. : ^ Bhagwati, P.. “S. P. Gupta v. President of India”indiankanoon.org. Indian Kanoon. Retrieved 15 January 2013.
    2. ^ Verma (for the majority), J S. “Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India”indiankanoon.org. Indian Kanoon. Retrieved 15 January 2013.
    3. ^ Barucha, S. P.. “In re Special Reference 1 of 1998”indiankanoon.org. Indian Kanoon. Retrieved 15 January 2013.
    4. ^ Express News Service. “Apex court junks PIL to revisit collegium system”The Indian Express. Retrieved 15 January 2013.
      [ Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Judges_Cases ]



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s