Former Union Law Minister Advocates Change in Judicial Appointments amidst Growing Public Sentiment
In a stirring interview with PTI, former Union Law Minister Ashwani Kumar expressed strong views on the pressing need to replace the current collegium system of judicial appointments in India. He contended that the public opinion is shifting robustly in favor of a revised mechanism, echoing sentiments that have gained traction since the National Judicial Appointments Committee (NJAC) proposal first emerged in 2014. Kumar argues that the time is unequivocally ripe for legislative and procedural reform in the judiciary, a crucial pillar of democracy.
Who? What? Where? When? Why? And How?
The former law minister, who played a pivotal role in drafting the NJAC bill during his tenure, articulated his belief that the judiciary is suffering from systemic ailments that need immediate address. He drew attention to the Supreme Court’s responsibility in establishing robust internal mechanisms to handle issues related to judicial integrity, particularly in light of recent controversies involving judges. The interview, which sheds light on Kumar’s perspectives, was published on Sunday, marking a significant moment in national discourse regarding judicial reform.
Kumar noted that the NJAC proposal ultimately faced rejection from the Supreme Court in October 2015, a ruling he firmly contests. His rationale centers on the premise that the judiciary’s independence and the process through which judges are appointed are separate issues—an assertion that he believes could lead to a more effective and transparent system. He underlined that government involvement does not necessarily compromise judicial independence.
As per the report by PTI, Kumar’s views reflect a growing concern about both the legitimacy of judicial oversight on legislative matters and the perceived encroachment of political influence within the judiciary. The former minister believes that ongoing judicial developments risk alienating the public’s trust in the justice system, necessitating greater accountability and reform.
Examining the Past: NJAC and Judicial Independence
The NJAC was designed to revolutionize the judicial appointment process by incorporating more diverse expert opinions, including those from government representatives. However, its constitutionality was challenged on the basis that it could dilute judicial independence—a notion Kumar disputes. He argues that the judiciary must not shy away from collaboration with the executive in matters of appointments, stating, “Where can we derive the presumption that the government will always recommend judges that are first class?”
Kumar’s criticism extends to the judiciary’s approach in recent years to major legislation passed by Parliament, which have increasingly found their way to the courts. He highlighted that political disputes should be resolved through democratic processes rather than through judicial review, which is intended to safeguard citizens’ fundamental rights—not overturn the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives.
Institutional Integrity: Addressing Recent Controversies
The interview also touched upon a controversial incident involving the recovery of cash from a high court judge’s residence in Delhi, which Kumar termed “unfortunate.” He emphasized that such incidents can taint the judiciary’s institutional integrity and called upon the Supreme Court to review its in-house procedures to ensure fairness and balance in dealing with similar allegations.
Kumar lamented the preemptive public scrutiny that judicial officials face during investigations, citing how the media frenzy and administrative actions can undermine the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. He articulated the need for a more equitable process to protect judges from frivolous allegations while establishing effective avenues for addressing legitimate concerns.
“It is absolutely true that the unfortunate incident has cast a long shadow on the institutional integrity of the judiciary,” he pointed out, reflecting a broader concern that the existing systems may not adequately safeguard against both genuine misconduct and unjust accusations.
The Road Ahead: Advocating for Legislative Change
With calls for reform growing louder, Kumar underscored that the government has the constitutional authority to propose amendments aimed at improving the appointment process. He posited that a revised NJAC or a new mechanism—crafted with input from a broad spectrum of stakeholders—could strengthen public trust and enhance the judiciary’s credibility.
The former law minister reflected on the fundamental principles that should govern judicial appointments, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a balanced relationship between the judiciary and the executive. The interdependence of these institutions, he argued, serves as a cornerstone for a thriving constitutional democracy, and drawing rigid lines between them could lead to institutional conflicts detrimental to governance.
Kumar’s insightful observations pose pertinent questions about the future of judicial appointments in India. With an increasing number of laws being challenged in courts, there is a palpable need for clarity and reform to enhance the judiciary’s role while respecting the bounds of political governance.
For anyone interested in understanding the intricacies of judicial reforms and their implications on democracy, further readings on the kollegium system and the judicial system in India offer valuable insights into the ongoing debates surrounding judicial integrity and independence.
As the conversation around judicial reform continues to evolve, Kumar’s proposals resonate deeply with the national sentiment, making it imperative for policymakers, legal experts, and the public to engage in meaningful dialogue aimed at fortifying the pillars of justice in India.
DISCLAIMER
We have taken every measure to ensure that the information in this article and on our social media platforms is accurate, verified, and obtained from reliable sources. For feedback or complaints, please contact us at info@hamslive.com.