In a wide-ranging and candid discussion at a recent Idea Exchange session, former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S Oka reaffirmed the Constitution as the sole “divine” guide for the judiciary, dismissing the idea of external influences in legal decision-making.Addressing critical contemporary issues—ranging from the delicate balance between development and environmental protection to the rising representation of women in trial courts—Justice Oka emphasised that judicial authority must always stand the test of law.Also Read | ‘As sitting judge, don’t talk to media’: Ex- Supreme Court’s Justice Abhay S Oka on environmental activism, admitting errors and why comedians are importantHe also shared provocative advice for the legal fraternity, suggesting that the best judges are those who don’t seek the bench, but rather answer a “call of duty” after a successful career at the bar.On ‘divine or bovine’ guidance for judgesThe judge stressed that judges have “taken oath under the Constitution” to decide issues in accordance with law and the Constitution. “When judges have to decide, that is our only guide. Sometimes we do take time to decide. The issues are so complex that we have to do a lot of thinking, a lot of research. Sometimes the formulation of judgment takes time. There are cases where we prepare 15-16 or more drafts of the judgment before we finalise,” he said.Justice Oka underlined the Constitution, the law, the concept of law and the experience as judges and members of the legal fraternity, to be “only guidance” and source for writing judgments. “I don’t think there can be any other source,” he said.On balancing development and environmentThe judge had a “simple” answer.Story continues below this ad“There are laws related to the environment. There is a fundamental right to live in a pollution-free atmosphere. The law is very clear that you cannot do anything in violation of law regarding the environment, because it has a source in the constitution itself,” Justice Oka said.Referring to Article 48A (state shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country), he noted the “fundamental duty” to preserve and protect the environment.“When there is an action by the executive or government, it has to stand the test of law, whether it is the constitution or the environmental law or any other law. You can’t say that just because you want to do so-called development, we will bypass or breach the law. You can’t say that. It’s as simple as that. There can’t be any conflict. Every action of every authority has to be in terms of law,” Justice Oka declared. Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S Oka shared provocative advice for the legal fraternity, suggesting that the best judges are those who don’t seek the bench, but rather answer a “call of duty” after a successful career at the bar.On gender insensitive remarks in judicial ordersJustice Oka felt that there could be judgments bearing a language without the desired sensitivity, particularly in Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act cases, among other things.Story continues below this ad“It all depends on the upbringing of judges and therefore now during last about 15-20 years, the rigorous training which goes for civil judges and district judges, there are state judicial academies, there are national judicial academy and during last 4-5 years even national judicial academy is arranging training courses for the newly appointed high court judges,” he said.Underlining the requirement to be “very careful” while writing a judgment, the former top court judge said there were also judgments that shouldn’t have been authored with a particular language.“If you see the ultimate finding, it is in terms of law. But that’s a concern and therefore you must know about three years back, the Supreme Court has published a booklet on what the ideal language. So there’s work happening in judicial academies because that’s a need of the hour,” he added.On gender disparity in judiciaryDiscussing the state of trial and district courts, the judges said practically in all states, barring a few exceptions, in the last five to six years, data of civil judges of ages 26 years or 27 years, over than 50 per cent of the newly-appointed judges were women.Story continues below this ad“That’s a big change that has happened during the last 10 years. Then, if you see the rules regarding recruitment of the district and civilian, in most of the states, there is a reservation,” he said.Referring to the situation in Maharashtra, he recalled the criticism about the Bombay High Court not having a reservation.“But at that time there were figures which were available, even without reservation, also there were representations, say of 37%, 38% to the reserved category. I think things are changing very fast and if you have this scenario that more than 50% of our trial court judges or district judges are women, proportionately their percentage will go up,” he shared.Pointing out the main concern of why women were not coming forward, he stressed on the “changing” time and illustrated with the increased number of female students in law schools across the country.Story continues below this ad“Now my experience has been in moot court competitions, except one which I attended recently, where the winners are always girls. So now girls are occupying a field in the entire system, so it’s a matter of time that things will change,” he said.On prolonged incarceration without bail in casesJustice Oka referred to cases where there could be a long incarceration of a person without the prospect of trial starting or trial concluding in reasonable time.“Some cases there are 200-300 witnesses, they stay by some court. So if for no fault of the accused, the trial gets prolonged and there is long incarceration. Normally by invoking Article 21, the accused is entitled to bail unless you point out that he has antecedents, that he has passed criminal history of committing serious offences,” he said.As a lawyer, you should not aspire to become a judge. But if you are successful as a lawyer and someday your senior judge or the high court or chief justice calls you and requests you to take up that assignment, it’s a call of dutyOn lawyers aspiring to be judgesJustice Oka suggested that lawyers should not aspire to become judges.Story continues below this ad“Your job should be to do your best as a lawyer because you know if you have ambition, then sometimes you tend to compromise.”On a lighter note, the judge illustrated with a situation where a lawyer is appearing before the Chief Justice, and often it happens with lawyers that judges take a view, and lawyers strongly counter the judges.“You may stop doing that. As a lawyer, you should not aspire to become a judge. But if you are successful as a lawyer and someday your senior judge or the high court or chief justice calls you and requests you to take up that assignment, it’s a call of duty,” he said.The judge highlighted it was not about aspiring, but “accepting that great honour” when it came someone’s way.