The Modi led
government recently passed the Judicial Appointment Commission Act 2014 in the
parliment. The Act seeks to wrestle back
the power of appointment of judges of high court and Supreme Court from the
Supreme Court’s collegium system. In
the old collegium system a small band of senior judges of SC would decide the
appointment of the judges of constitutional courts (HC and SC) on its own
accord.
In 1993, the
collegium system came into force after the 3 judges case and supreme court’s
response on presidential reference on the question of judicial appointment to
president KR Narayanan. The effect was
that the appointment of judges was made totally independent of the government
of India and remained so for over 20 years.
Over the
years various law commission reports highlighted the problem with the collegium
system. Many of them contented that the
decision in the 3 judges case and the response to presidential reference was
blatantly erroneous. The reasoning was
that the constitution itself provided that appointment should be made by the
president in consultation with others.
The problem
with the old system was mutifarious. For
one it was shrouded in the darkness of high secrecy and no one could guess who
would be appointed. It was a
non-transparent process. Two, the
members of collegium were far removed from the state and the courts where they
sought to appoint their selected judges in and had no awareness of ground
realities. Many judges called the
appointments as judicial appointment and lambasted the collegium system. Even great legal luminaries like AP shah of
Delhi high Court were not elevated to the bench of supreme court which went on
to prove how fickle the system really worked.
While it is
true that the system of Appointment of judges by the Collegium was always
controversial and accused of being non-transparent, reeking od nepotism and
favouritism. It was by all means a
thoroughly Independent process. The
Political masters of this country had no say in appointment of any judges of
the High Court of Supreme Court for the last 20 years. While the Individual appointments could
always be protested, what could not be protested in the last 20 years was the
Independent system of Appointment. While
this led to disappointments for many, the courts by and large worked in a
totally Independent manner punishing many politicians and high ranking officers
where the need arose.
Under the new
system devised by Pradhan Sevak, the judicial appointment commission needs a
majority of 5 out of 6 members for any Appointment to be made. The government of India along with its
nominees contitute 3 members and the other are 2 senior judges of the high
court along with the chief justice of India himself of the board.
While
primafacie it looks as though the board constitutes an Independent process of
appointment as the political executive has no majority say in the appointment
(3 out of 6), a deeper analysis reveals that it is not the case.
The political executive has now arrogated itself with powers to stall the elevation of any judge who it does not prefer. Simply put, while it is true that the government nominees do not have majority in appointment of Judges in the commission, it is still possible to stall the elevation of any judge to high court or supreme court because a consensus of 5 out of 6 members must be reached for any appointments.
Now if the
trial court judge does not grant yedurappa a bail, rest assured the judge will
retire as a judge of the trial court and be never elevated to High court by the
government despite his illustrious career by using the 3 government nominee on
Appointment board. In future if any High
Court judge passes strictures against the government of India or political
party. Rest assured, he will never
become judge of the Supreme court in his life time.
Judicial
Appointment commission poses strongest challenge to Independence of the
Judiciary since the days of Indira Gandhi.
It is now hoped that the supreme Court will now suo motto take up this
matter and quash the Judicial Appointment Commission Act as being Ultra Vires
the constitutional separation of powers between Executive and the
Judiciary.
In simple
words, the political lords of this country should have no business to do with
the judiciary much less be able to stall the elevation of judges of high
integrity and caliber who may not be to their liking and who may have passed
strictures against them in the past.
If the
collegium system was accused of Nepotism or favouritism the way forward was to
make it transparent system. The solution
was not to let the political lords of this country have a say in who should sit
on the benches of constitutional courts.
The last
bastion of Indian democracy now stands
on a shaky pillar, whose foundations are being progressively hollowed by those
who claim to bring "Ache din".
Should stroke of pen be allowed to destroy judicial independence of
worlds largest democracy and obliterate its last bastion?
That is the
thought for consideration.
No comments:
Post a Comment