"Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done." Discuss the importance of judicial disclosure and recusal norms, using recent examples.

Courts draw their authority from public trust, not from force. So a verdict must be correct and must also look fair. India's judges adopted this maxim in the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997) [1]. Disclosure (telling the parties about possible conflicts) and recusal (stepping away from a case) put that principle into practice.

Why these norms matter

• Nemo judex in causa sua: no one should judge their own cause. The test is apparent bias, meaning a fair-minded observer could doubt the judge's neutrality. Actual bias does not have to be proved.
• Institutional legitimacy: citizens accept rulings that go against them only if they trust the process.
• Finality of verdicts: a conflict revealed late can reopen a decided case, which wastes judicial time.
• Ethical standard: the Restatement says a judge must not let a close relative who is a lawyer be "associated in any manner" with a case the judge is hearing [1].

Recent examples

• CEC appointment case (2026): a two-judge Bench split on whether to send the challenge to the CEC & ECs Act, 2023 to a Constitution Bench [2][3]. A plea now seeks recall of Justice S.C. Sharma's opinion. It says he did not disclose, over several hearings, that his son was a standing counsel for the ECI [2]. The case concerns how the EC's leadership is chosen, and PRS has flagged that the panel's government majority "may undermine the independence of the ECI" [4]. A process that looks unfair here undermines two institutions at once.
• NJAC case (2015): the Court rejected the plea to recuse a judge from the Bench. Recusal was left to the judge's own conscience, without any fixed standard [5].

Gaps

• There is no binding, written recusal code, and recusal decisions are rarely explained.
• Rules on disclosing family members' clients are unclear.
• Few ways exist to object before the verdict is given.

Way forward

• Mandatory declarations at the first hearing, covering relatives' professional links.
• Written, reasoned recusal orders. Contested recusal pleas could go to another Bench.
• Turn the Restatement into an enforceable code, following the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.

Disclosure and recusal protect the courts' legitimacy, not just the individual judge. Clear, enforceable rules would turn ad hoc recusal into standard practice. They would also uphold the Article 14 promise of fair procedure and the SDG 16 goal of accountable institutions, so that justice is both done and seen to be done.