From calling it a "near perfect" system to questioning the appointment of Justice Victoria Gowri, retired Supreme Court and High Court judges spoke at length about the collegium system at a seminar organised by the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) on Saturday, 18 February.
Ex-Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, former Supreme Court Justices Indira Banerjee and Deepak Gupta, and former Delhi High Court Chief Justice AP Shah, among others, spoke at the event.
The consensus between the judges, however, that can be drawn from a perusal of news reports pertaining to the event, is that the collegium system must prevail and any attempts to amplify the government's sway in the appointment process ought to be discouraged. However, is there room for improvement within the existing system? Yes, it seems so.
Here are some highlights of the judges' remarks.
Ex-Judges Discuss Collegium, Justice Victoria Gowri's Appointment: Key Points
1. Ex-Chief Justice of India UU Lalit
Ex-CJI UU Lalit.
(Photo Courtesy: Wikipedia/ Altered by The Quint)
The recently retired chief justice of India (CJI) was of the view that there is no better system than the collegium for appointments. He backed this up by pointing out that the judiciary is in a better position to judge the merits of the candidates, having been privy to their performance over the years.
Read more about former CJI Lalit's address here.
Expand2. Ex-Supreme Court Justice Deepak Gupta
Justice Deepak Gupta, a former judge of the Supreme Court
(Photo Courtesy: Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association/ Altered by The Quint)
Justice Deepak Gupta, a former judge of the Supreme Court, suggested ways in which the independence of the judiciary could be ensured. These suggestions included a common retirement age for all constitutional courts and eventually, doing away with post retirement benefits.
Further, he lamented the delay exhibited by the State in approving the appointments and discussed claims of a discrepancy in the amount of time it takes for the government to approve names from different communities.
“If these figures are correct and I believe them to be correct, it is a very dangerous trend. So, you are making sure that they never become Senior Judges; CJs and never reach the Supreme Court. So, this should be in the public domain, so that we can ask questions.”
Ex-Supreme Court Justice Deepak GuptaExpand3. Ex-Supreme Court Justice Indira Banerjee
Justice Indira Banerjee, former judge of the Supreme Court
Justice Indira Banerjee, former judge of the Supreme Court, on her part, talked about the flaws in the collegium system. She did, however, say that:
“Whether you agree that there should be a collegium, or disagree, the fact remains that it has been judicially established. So, we are bound by it.”
Her suggestions included the need to streamline the minimum criteria for appointment laid down in the Constitution, and in case of an exception to the criteria “good reasons” be given. She also talked about the need for a “permeant secretariat” and a “candidates bank, or a permanent register containing names of prospective candidates.” The names in the bank should, thereby, be recommended by judges, senior advocates, or bar associations.
“However, one should ensure that the recommendations of bar associations are genuine and not a ploy to appease the bar with a view to secure votes in elections,” Justice Banerjee added.
Justice Banerjee also noted in her address that there is no reason why the collegium cannot reconsider its recommendation on honest and genuine grounds. She also drew from her own experience to talk about the difficulty of removing a judge once appointed.
Expand4. Ex-Delhi High Court Justice AP Shah
File photo of Justice AP Shah.
(Photo: PTI) Former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court AP Shah, in his address, lamented the fact that “this Government has infiltrated the collegium system” and completely disagreed with the idea of the law minister becoming a part of the collegium discussion.
He also referred to the appointment of Justice Victoria Gowri as an additional judge of the Madras High Court as “a prime example of what can happen when this process collapses.”
While maintaining that the process of appointments required greater transparency, Justice Shah criticised the way the government was obstructing appointments, and its functionaries were criticising the collegium system.
(With inputs and quotes from LiveLaw.)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)
Expand
Ex-Chief Justice of India UU Lalit
Ex-CJI UU Lalit.
(Photo Courtesy: Wikipedia/ Altered by The Quint)
The recently retired chief justice of India (CJI) was of the view that there is no better system than the collegium for appointments. He backed this up by pointing out that the judiciary is in a better position to judge the merits of the candidates, having been privy to their performance over the years.
Read more about former CJI Lalit's address here.
Ex-Supreme Court Justice Deepak Gupta
Justice Deepak Gupta, a former judge of the Supreme Court
(Photo Courtesy: Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association/ Altered by The Quint)
Justice Deepak Gupta, a former judge of the Supreme Court, suggested ways in which the independence of the judiciary could be ensured. These suggestions included a common retirement age for all constitutional courts and eventually, doing away with post retirement benefits.
Further, he lamented the delay exhibited by the State in approving the appointments and discussed claims of a discrepancy in the amount of time it takes for the government to approve names from different communities.
“If these figures are correct and I believe them to be correct, it is a very dangerous trend. So, you are making sure that they never become Senior Judges; CJs and never reach the Supreme Court. So, this should be in the public domain, so that we can ask questions.”Ex-Supreme Court Justice Deepak Gupta
Ex-Supreme Court Justice Indira Banerjee
Justice Indira Banerjee, former judge of the Supreme Court
Justice Indira Banerjee, former judge of the Supreme Court, on her part, talked about the flaws in the collegium system. She did, however, say that:
“Whether you agree that there should be a collegium, or disagree, the fact remains that it has been judicially established. So, we are bound by it.”
Her suggestions included the need to streamline the minimum criteria for appointment laid down in the Constitution, and in case of an exception to the criteria “good reasons” be given. She also talked about the need for a “permeant secretariat” and a “candidates bank, or a permanent register containing names of prospective candidates.” The names in the bank should, thereby, be recommended by judges, senior advocates, or bar associations.
“However, one should ensure that the recommendations of bar associations are genuine and not a ploy to appease the bar with a view to secure votes in elections,” Justice Banerjee added.
Justice Banerjee also noted in her address that there is no reason why the collegium cannot reconsider its recommendation on honest and genuine grounds. She also drew from her own experience to talk about the difficulty of removing a judge once appointed.
Ex-Delhi High Court Justice AP Shah
File photo of Justice AP Shah.
Former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court AP Shah, in his address, lamented the fact that “this Government has infiltrated the collegium system” and completely disagreed with the idea of the law minister becoming a part of the collegium discussion.
He also referred to the appointment of Justice Victoria Gowri as an additional judge of the Madras High Court as “a prime example of what can happen when this process collapses.”
While maintaining that the process of appointments required greater transparency, Justice Shah criticised the way the government was obstructing appointments, and its functionaries were criticising the collegium system.
(With inputs and quotes from LiveLaw.)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)