Supreme Court Demands Accountability on Judicial Appointments

Why in the news?

The Supreme Court is pressing the government for explanations regarding delays in judicial appointments, emphasising the importance of Collegium recommendations in maintaining constitutional integrity and governance efficiency.

About the Supreme Court’s Inquiry into Judicial Appointments:

  • Government’s Delay: The Supreme Court questioned the government about delays in appointing judges, stressing that the Collegium’s recommendations cannot be treated as mere suggestions subject to government discretion.
  • Status Request: Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud instructed the Attorney General to provide a tabulated report within a week detailing the status of all pending Collegium recommendations and the reasons for delays.
  • Importance of Collegium: The Chief Justice emphasised that the Collegium has a constitutional status, differentiating it from a search committee, whose recommendations can be ignored.
  • The court noted that ignoring repeated recommendations undermines established judicial appointment conventions.

Concerns from Advocates:

  • Ongoing Issues: Senior advocates raised concerns about High Courts operating with Acting Chief Justices for extended periods and the pressing need for appointments.
  • Highlighted Cases: Advocates mentioned specific cases, including Saurabh Kirpal, nominated for Delhi High Court, and John Sathyan, nominated for Madras High Court, both of whom have faced long delays despite repeated recommendations.
  • Urgent Action Requested: Lawyers argued for immediate appointments and suggested that if the government fails to respond to recommendations within six weeks, they should be automatically accepted.

About the Collegium System in Indian Judiciary:

  • Purpose: Appointment and transfer of Supreme Court and High Court judges.
  • Origins: Evolved through Supreme Court judgments, not in the Constitution.
  • Composition:
    • Supreme Court: CJI + 4 senior-most judges.
    • High Court: Chief Justice + 2 senior-most judges.
  • Government Role: Can raise objections but must appoint if Collegium reiterates.

Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Appointments:

  • Article 124: Supreme Court judges appointed by the President after consulting relevant judges.
  • Article 217: High Court judges appointed by the President after consulting CJI, state Governor, and Chief Justice.

Steps to Improve Judicial Appointments:

  • 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014: Proposed NJAC to replace the collegium system, but struck down for violating judicial independence.
  • Memorandum of Procedure (MoP):
    • Framed in 1999, outlines rules for appointing Supreme Court and High Court judges.
    • Judges appointed by the Collegium (CJI + 4 senior-most judges); recommendations forwarded to the central government.
  • Revised MoP (2015):
    • The Supreme Court directed a new MoP for transparency.
    • Finalised in 2017, but not adopted by the government.

Associated Article:

https://universalinstitutions.com/supreme-court/