In a democratic society, the appointment of judges is a critical aspect of maintaining judicial independence and upholding the rule of law. The judiciary must be free from any political or non-political influence to ensure impartiality and effective functioning. In India, the process of judicial appointments has seen various iterations, and one significant development has been the emergence of the Collegium system. This blog aims to shed light on the origin, advantages, disadvantages, and recent developments surrounding the Collegium system in India.
Origin of the Collegium System
The Collegium system, although not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution, evolved from recommendations made by the Bar Council of India in 1981. The system proposed a broader-based committee for the appointment of Supreme Court Judges, consisting of the Chief Justice of India, five senior judges of the Supreme Court, and two representatives from the Bar Council of India and the Supreme Court Bar Association. This committee's recommendations were intended to be binding on the President, subject to reconsideration under certain circumstances.
The Collegium system was established through judicial pronouncements, particularly the Second and Third Judges' Cases. The former, in 1993, gave primacy to the Chief Justice of India's (CJI) opinion in the consultative process, formed by considering the views of two senior-most judges. The latter, in 1998, further clarified the composition and functioning of the Collegium, consisting of the CJI and the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. The Collegium's recommendations gained significance in the appointment process, reducing the executive's role.
Advantages of the Collegium System
1. Independence from Political Influence: The Collegium system ensures that the appointment of judges is free from political influence, safeguarding judicial independence and preventing any interference from the executive.
2. Expertise-Based Selection: With judges involved in the appointment process, the system benefits from their expertise and knowledge of the legal fraternity, resulting in the selection of deserving candidates.
3. Secrecy and Opaqueness: The Collegium system maintains secrecy in its decision-making, allowing judges to work without fear or favor and reducing the chances of undue external pressure.
4. Timely Appointment of Judges: By eliminating the prolonged involvement of the executive, the Collegium system expedites the appointment process, filling vacancies in a timely manner.
Disadvantages of the Collegium System
1. Lack of Transparency: The Collegium system lacks transparency and guidelines in selecting candidates, leading to allegations of nepotism and favoritism and hindering the appointment of the most deserving candidates.
2. Non-Accountability: The Collegium system is not accountable to any administrative body, potentially resulting in wrong choices without any checks or balances.
3. Delay in Appointments: Sometimes, the process of consultation and decision-making within the Collegium can lead to delays in filling judicial vacancies, impacting the judicial system's efficiency.
4. Violation of Checks and Balances: The system may lead to a violation of the principle of checks and balances as the executive's role is diminished significantly, raising concerns about misuse of power.
Recent Developments
The Collegium system has been a subject of debate and criticism. In 2014, the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) Act was introduced to replace the Collegium system. However, the Supreme Court declared the Act and the 99th Constitutional Amendment unconstitutional, upholding the Collegium system's continuity.
Recently, there have been discussions on reforming the Collegium system to ensure transparency and accountability. Some suggestions include establishing a well-resourced independent secretariat for judicial appointments, creating a database of eligible candidates, and involving both the judiciary and the executive in the appointment process.
Conclusion
The Collegium system, despite its advantages in ensuring judicial independence, is not without flaws. It lacks transparency and guidelines, leading to concerns about nepotism and favoritism. The recent discussions on reforming the system are essential to maintain public confidence and uphold the rule of law. A balanced approach that includes both the judiciary and the executive in the appointment process may be a step towards an improved and transparent system that appoints the most deserving candidates to uphold justice in the nation.
Note for UPSC Aspirants: For UPSC aspirants interested in exploring further, here are some keywords to guide your research: National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC), Judicial Reforms in India, Executive-Judiciary Relations in India, Judicial Ethics and Code of Conduct for Judges
Source: The Hindu | Legal Service India
Comments