‘NJAC ensures transparency’

June 13, 2015 02:35 am | Updated November 16, 2021 05:00 pm IST - NEW DELHI:

The career graph of a former Supreme Court judge became a hot topic of debate on Friday between the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench hearing the merits of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) and the government on what qualities make an ideal judge.

On the last day of the government’s arguments to justify the replacement of the two-decade-old collegium system of judges appointing judges with the “broad-based” NJAC law, Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi once again took up the case of the particular former judge, saying he hardly rendered any judgment before he was elevated to the Supreme Court and the collegium went on to render laurels on him.

“In the Supreme Court, he was part of only five judgments of which in two he concurred with main judgments delivered. The two concurring judgments of his were each a paragraph long ... and I am not taking all this out of a hat. I have looked at documents never shown to anyone before,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted.

But Justice J.S. Khehar, who leads the Bench, countered why the government went ahead to appoint this judge in the NHRC when it had so little opinion of his prowess.

The Bench further asked whether a judge’s ability should be tested by the number of judgments he scripted.

“When you say someone should be ‘fit’ to be a judge, do you mean that we will need a medical certificate saying it is assured we will live till 65 years of age,” Justice Kurian Joseph asked the A-G.

Justice Madan B. Lokur, another of the judges on the Bench, said the evaluation procedure in the NJAC before a person was recommended to the Bench was mostly followed by the present collegium already.

“But the shroud of mystery associated with the collegium will not change. The provisions of the NJAC do not destroy the Constitution’s intent, it only adds transparency and roles to civil society, the executive and the judiciary,” Mr. Rohatgi replied.

The Attorney-General said proper guidelines would be in place for appointing judges.

‘Decisive voice’

Arguing for the State of Madhya Pradesh, senior advocate K.K. Venugopal said the 1993 judgment saw the judiciary wrested from the executive its “decisive voice” in judicial appointments.

“In India, it is myth to say that if judges are appointed by the executive, they would be loyal to the government. The most powerful judges whoever existed in the country were appointed by the executive,” Mr. Venugopal submitted.

Top News Today

Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.