Ex-CJI UU Lalit: Collegium System best available; must thrive, appointments not 'whimsical'

 

The former Chief Justice of India, UU Lalit has defended the Collegium System saying that it is the best one available and we must ensure that this system survives, thrives and gives us the best possible results.

He emphasised that Collegium, which recommends appointment of judges to High Courts and the Supreme Court, takes its decisions after thorough deliberations and after weighing all considerations and that the appointment process is not a 'whimsical exercise'

 

The Ex-CJI while speaking at an event organised by Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) on the topic "Judicial appointments and reforms" brushed off the criticism hurduled at the Collegium System that it is restricted to being an exercise to ensure a nepotistic cycle continues in judicial selection.

"It is not like it is a whimsical exercise undertaken by somebody down the line only with a view to see that judges have the opportunity to select their successor. It is a fool proof exercise. Imagine whether the executive or will the apparatus (Collegium) be in a better situation to select a judge," he assured.

The Judge also offered a glimpse into the process and maintained that it involves rigorous filtering of the names and there are lots of checks and balances.

 

"If there is a appointment in Karnataka High Court then a Supreme Court judge who has been in Karnataka is consulted or his opinion is taken into consideration. So at the level of Supreme Court collegium when we sit to clear names we take into consideration all of this. There are often 5 consultee judges and there cannot be unanimity on name so we have to go by some parameters at the level of Supreme Court. After this rigorous filtering names are recommended. Then matter goes to Central government. Their inputs are taken into consideration but they may have something to elaborate on and their objections come back to the collegium," said the former CJI.

He stressed that the Supreme Court Collegium is very peculiar even when it comes to appointment of some 'particular names' as he disclosed how once one member downloaded 1100 judgements to scrutanize their quality.

"In one of the cases where a particular name was to be considered, a judge of the Supreme Court downloaded 1,100 judgments of the man just to see if the judgments are of a particular quality. That is the kind of consideration which is bestowed.. so what is seen is number of years of practice.. judgments authored and how much income he earns. There may be infirmity on personal front of complaint by bar council etc. but that part is taken care of by IB clearance and State government profile and when it reaches Supreme Court it is about whether it is to be accepted or not to be accepted," he said.

 

He however, admitted to the vacillation in the process which is a reason why, at times, recommendations made by the High Court Collegium are dropped by the Supreme Court Collegium after discussion with consultee judges in the Supreme Court who hails from the concerned State.

Furher elaborating on the process being a 'fool proof measure', the Ex-CJI ruled out need of any external interference.

"If an appointment is to be made in Karnataka High Court, then a Supreme Court judge who has been in Karnataka is consulted or his opinion is taken into consideration......So at the level of Supreme Court collegium when we sit to clear names we take into consideration all of this. There are often 5 consultee judges and there cannot be unanimity on name so we have to go by some parameters at the level of Supreme Court. After this rigorous filtering names are recommended. Then the matter goes to the Central government. Their inputs are taken into consideration but they may have something to elaborate on and their objections come back to the collegium," the judge stated.

 He insisted on viewing of the seriousness bestowed in the process while explaining as to any objection raised by the Government is considered on merit as well. He discussed one incident to this regard. 

 

Social media is bold. 

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free. 

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant. 

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language)

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!   

We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our

journalism free from government and corporate pressure .