Tuesday, November 12, 2019
facebook
Nation

Posted at: Oct 18, 2015, 10:37 AM; last updated: Oct 18, 2015, 10:37 AM (IST)

All 5 SC judges acknowledge criticism against collegium

Two judges were most vocal against the system

  • Justices J Chelameswar and Kurian Joseph found merit in the allegations of lack of transparency and accountability in Collegium system
  • Justice Kurian was the most vocal against the 22-year-old system, the dissenting judge being Justice Chelameswar
  • Justice Kurian said “the trust deficit had affected the credibility of the Collegium” as deserving persons were ignored
  • Justice Chelameswar said Collegium had no accountability as its “records are absolutely beyond the reach of any person, including the judges of this court...”
All 5 SC judges acknowledge criticism against collegium
Justices Kurian Joseph and J Chelameswar

R Sedhuraman

Legal Correspondent

New Delhi, October 17

All five judges of the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench that restored the collegium yesterday have acknowledged in their judgments that the system of appointing higher judiciary judges was facing severe criticism.

But only Justices J Chelameswar and Kurian Joseph found merit in the serious allegations, while the other three — Justices JS Khehar (who heads the Bench), MB Lokur and AK Goel — maintained that there was not much substance in these remarks and if at all there was some the Executive was equally responsible. All of them agreed to consider suggestions for improving the functioning of the 22-year-old collegium by slating November 3 for hearing arguments on this aspect.

Justice Kurian was the most vocal against the collegium system sought to be replaced with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) through the NJAC Act, which was struck down by the 4-1 majority verdict, the dissenting judge being Justice Chelameswar.

“All told, all was and is not well... collegium system lacks transparency, accountability and objectivity,” he observed. He went on to say that “the trust deficit had affected the credibility of the collegium” as deserving persons were ignored wholly for subjective reasons and certain appointments were purposely delayed.

Justice Kurian said some allegations were about the blatant violation of the guidelines resulting in unmerited, if not bad, appointments, and the dictatorial attitude of the collegium that had seriously affected the “self-respect and dignity, if not independence, of judges.”

However, he went with the majority verdict against NJAC and said collegium could be improved. Justice Chelameswar noted that Collegium had no accountability as its “records are absolutely beyond the reach of any person, including the judges of this court who are not lucky enough to become the Chief Justice of India.” Such a state of affairs neither enhanced the credibility of the institution nor did any good for the people, he said. All this showed that “a comprehensive reform of the system is overdue,” he explained while upholding the validity of NJAC. He said the majority verdict was unfortunate.

COMMENTS

All readers are invited to post comments responsibly. Any messages with foul language or inciting hatred will be deleted. Comments with all capital letters will also be deleted. Readers are encouraged to flag the comments they feel are inappropriate.
The views expressed in the Comments section are of the individuals writing the post. The Tribune does not endorse or support the views in these posts in any manner.
Share On