Govt backtraces on judges' asset declaration in bill

What was the govt and law minister Mr Moily thinking? That they will allow judges to 'declare' assets but not made public? Declare but not public means declare to other judges? Right, what does 'declare' mean ? Declare to my family? To my pets? Read news below:

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/isolated-upa-chickens-out-on-judges-assets-bill/98510-3.html

Exceprt from the news:

Opposition leader and BJP member Arun Jaitley argued, "Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution which has been applied to any person anywhere in the country who is desirous of contesting an election - his assets are to be made public. But a different interpretation will now have to be given when it comes to assets of judges, the same cannot be made public."

Now politicians have been declaring assets without fail both in Lok Sabha and MLA elections. Some of the MPs have declared assets in excess of 500 Cr. That has not led to any false or frivolous cases being filed against MPs. Because people will not hound someone if there is nothing to hide. Declaration of assets and transparency leads to more trust in minds of public and hence leads to higher governance standards and overall efficiency.

Judges should now hold themselves accountable to the same high standards to which they have been holding others. Else what right do they have to sit in judgment?