Re: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS

19/8/16

This holier than thou attitude of the Chief justice is not helpful. It clearly negates any suggestion for improvement in the working of the judiciary. Corruption is not an issue for him. Suggestion that there should be court of Appeals in metropolitan cities like Chennai ,Calcutta and Mumbai is not acceptable to him. Commercial courts for Govt. litigation is not being implemented.Gram Panchayats and alternative fora to ease the pendency is not being implemented.Regds  

---

From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Venkatraman Ns <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2016 7:38 PM
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS

 

To

India Against Corruption      

                                                   CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW  RESTRAINT IN  HIS OBSERVATIONS

 

In open court, Chief Justice of India has accused central government of bringing the entire judiciary to a “grinding halt” by sitting on the recommendations of the collegium for appointment and transfer of judges to high courts across the country. It is disturbing that he went to the extent of saying that the court would not shy away from a confrontation with the government, if driven to a corner.  He made such remarks even when the Attorney General assured that the issue would be taken up at the highest level.

Even while the Chief Justice made such sharp remarks, the law minister has said that  appointment of number of judges would be finalized very soon. Is Chief Justice not aware of this?

The collegium issue has been under discussions for quite sometime now and many have questioned the judges themselves appointing the judges , when several judges at various levels have been caught in corruption scandals with one former Chief Justice of India himself  being one of the accused.

Government stand appears  to be that there must be proper procedure and transparency in selection of judges. There is nothing wrong with this view.

 Chief Justice rejects the government’s view and insists that he should have the final say. This stand of the Chief Justice is the origin of the confrontation.

It would have been appropriate if Chief Justice has read the mood of the people, who are increasingly not sure about  the caliber of some of the judges.

Reflecting such public mood , he should accept the need for a level of transparency in the appointment of judges. Threat of confrontation by Chief Justice is not in tune with the functioning  of the judiciary.

 

N.S.Venkataraman

Nandini Voice for The Deprived