THE FIRM August 22: National Judicial Appointments Commission Vs The Collegium System

Описание: THE FIRM August 22: National Judicial Appointments Commission Vs The Collegium System
Last week, an otherwise nugatory parliament, that rarely gets any work done, showed great speed in passing 2 Bills most crucial to the future of India’s judiciary- Bills that determine the appointment of judges. An independent judiciary is a basic feature of our constitution and an absolutely essential safeguard against political excesses. Does that independence stand threatened now? Article 124 of the Constitution says ‘every judge of the supreme court shall be appointed by the president… after consultation with such of the judges of the supreme court and of the high courts in the states as the president may deem necessary for the purpose…’ From the early years of our republic, judicial appointments were done by the executive. In Senior Advocate Iqbal Chagla’s words “The collegium system is a result of the disenchantment with the executive's appointment of judges who were expected in the 70s to subscribe to the philosophy, not of the Constitution, but of the government of the day.” Chagla was among those who first challenged this appointment process in 1981 but failed. In 1993, in the Second Judges Case, a 9 judge bench of the Supreme Court gave the Chief Justice of India primacy in judicial appointments. The collegium system was borne of that decision and expanded from 3 to 5 members in the subsequent 3 Judges’ Case in 1998. For over 20 years, the appointment of judges to the High Court and Supreme Court has been decided by the collegium. No system is perfect and the collegium is far from it. Opacity, arbitrariness, bias – the collegium has often been accused of side stepping merit for caste and regional representation and has also been accused of sometimes turning a blind eye to judicial corruption. The failures of the collegium system have given an old idea new life. Last year the UPA government introduced a Constitutional Amendment Bill and a Judicial Appointments Commission Bill. The UPA versions were improved on by the NDA and last week, in a rare show of solidarity, parliament passed both the 121st Amendment Bill and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Bill. There was little discussion or debate and the vote was unanimous. The lack of debate and the breakneck speed at which the Bills were passed has alarmed many. Yes, the Constitutional Amendment Act still needs approval from states and both Acts need presidential assent. But if last week’s parliamentary bonhomie was anything to go by, the JAC could soon be a reality. So this week, The Firm reached out to 8 more senior counsel and judges for their verdict on the NJAC vs Collegium debate! Here are the results of that poll.
WATCH ‘THE FIRM’ AT THESE TIMES ON CNBC-TV18
FRI: 10.30PM, SAT: 11.30AM, SUN 9.30 AM