Collegium is cumbersome

In a direct attack on the collegium system that alone selects judges to the superior courts, the Government has sought for itself “powers to suggest outstanding lawyers and jurists” to the post of judges. A Vision Statement presented by Law Minister M Veerappa Moily on Saturday also criticised the collegium for delays, pointing out that its large strength had “made consultation process cumbersome,” leading to delays in selection and elevation of judges. “The increased number of members of collegium has made the consultation process cumbersome and hence there is a delay in the selection and elevation of judges,” the Statement prepared by the Ministry of Law and Justice, said. The Statement further added, “Government should also be given the power to suggest outstanding lawyers and jurists as judges.” The document took a further dig at the collegium. It said, “There are no guidelines dealing with situations of a deadlock or lack of consensus among the members of the collegium, or dealing with situations where the majority members of the collegium disagree with the CJI.” Suggesting a remedy, the Vision Statement added that the collegium should be given a time-frame to clear the names, and both the executive and legislature must take initiative in recommending the best possible talent for selection to judiciary. Putting its demand as part of “suggested improvements” as a means to solve pendency, Moily — prior to the handing over of the document to the CJI at the inaugural function of a two-day consultation meeting of judges on “Strengthening the Judiciary towards Reducing Pendency and Delays” — said, “We suggest a lucid and comprehensive set of guidelines which the collegium should follow in the matter of selection of judges.” Suggesting comprehensive guidelines to regulate the collegium’s consultation and recommendation process, the Government gave a clear indication of its desire to acquire a prominent role in appointing judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts, a power it lost to the judiciary following a 1993 Supreme Court judgement in SC Advocate-on-Record Association case (later reiterated by the apex court in 1998), that introduced the collegium system. Till 1993, the process of consultation with Chief Justice of India alone was mandatory. It was given an expansive meaning by the apex court in 1993 which held the consultation process to include not just the CJI but four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, thus making it a consultation among judges rather than a consultation between the CJI and the Executive. It is this process that is now sought to be reversed. Later, Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan, responding to the issue, said, “As far as appointments to the Supreme Court are concerned, I must say that we are bound by the procedure in accordance with the Constitution Bench decisions given by our predecessors in 1993 and 1998. The proper forum for suggesting changes to the appointment process is the Union Parliament. It would, of course, not be proper for me to enter into a debate at this stage.” The Centre’s suggestion holds significance, especially in the wake of a Law Commission report submitted in November 2008 asking the Government either to challenge the 1993 decision or in the alternate provide statutory framework to the position existing prior to the said decision.