The Bangalore Principal of Judicial Conduct 2002. MCQ Quiz in हिन्दी - Objective Question with Answer for The Bangalore Principal of Judicial Conduct 2002. - मुफ्त [PDF] डाउनलोड करें

The correct answer is 'The Universal Declaration of Human Rights'

Key Points

• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
  • The Preamble of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002, explicitly references the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.
  • This principle underscores the importance of judicial independence and impartiality in ensuring fair justice.

Additional Information

• The Geneva Conventions:
  • The Geneva Conventions primarily focus on humanitarian treatment during war and conflict.
  • They do not specifically address the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.
• The World Health Organization Charter:
  • The World Health Organization (WHO) Charter focuses on global health matters and public health policies.
  • It does not pertain to judicial conduct or the right to a fair hearing.
• The UNCITRAL Model Law:
  • The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law deals with international trade law and arbitration.
  • It does not address the broader human rights context of fair and public hearings by independent tribunals.

The correct answer is The judge has different political views from the parties involved

Key Points

• The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct emphasize that judges must be impartial and free from conflicts of interest while performing their judicial duties. A judge must disqualify themselves from a case if their ability to decide the matter impartially is compromised or if it appears to a reasonable observer that impartiality is at risk.
• Valid reasons for disqualification include:
  • Previous involvement in the case – If the judge has previously served as a lawyer or witness in the same matter, it may compromise their objectivity.
  • Personal knowledge of disputed facts – If the judge has prior personal knowledge of key facts related to the case, their judgment could be influenced by information not presented in court.
  • Economic interest in the case outcome – If the judge or their family has a financial stake in the case, it creates a conflict of interest that could affect impartiality.

The correct answer is Accountability.

Key Points

• The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002, enumerate six core values that guide judicial conduct:
  • Independence: Ensures the judiciary functions without undue influence.
  • Impartiality: Emphasizes fair and unbiased decision-making.
  • Integrity: Promotes behavior above reproach.
  • Propriety: Advocates for behavior that upholds judicial dignity.
  • Equality: Ensures all are treated equally before the law.
  • Competence and Diligence: Highlights the need for judicial efficiency and knowledge.
• While accountability is implicit in judicial ethics, it is not explicitly listed as one of the core values in the Bangalore Principles.

The correct answer is Option 2.

Key Points

• Option A: Incorrect. The principles do not limit the term "Judge's spouse" to only a legally wedded spouse. This would be too restrictive and fail to account for other significant personal relationships.
• Option B: Correct. The term includes not only a legally wedded spouse but also a domestic partner or any person (of either gender) who is in a close personal relationship with the judge. This broader interpretation is crucial to ensure that the principles of propriety and impartiality extend to all relevant relationships.
• Option C: Incorrect. Limiting the definition to persons of the opposite sex is contrary to the inclusive and gender-neutral approach of the Bangalore Principles.
• Option D: Incorrect. The definition is explicitly outlined in the Bangalore Principles and is not "None of the above."

The correct answer is Peace Palace, The Hague.

Key Points

• The Bangalore Draft Code of Judicial Conduct 2001 was formulated as a foundational framework to establish principles of judicial ethics and integrity.
• It was adopted by the Judicial Group on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and later revised during the Round Table Meeting of Chief Justices at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on November 25-26, 2002. 
• The Code serves as a set of ethical guidelines for judges to ensure impartiality, independence, accountability, and integrity in the judiciary.
• Initially developed in Bangalore, India, it gained broader acceptance as an international benchmark for judicial conduct following its revision in The Hague.