Sir/ Madam
1. Your observations and suggestion that responses be restricted to the subject matter approved by the moderator are well appreciated. Indeed I responded only when subject matter was got distorted by topics like corruption, nepotism etc. It is your prerogative either to circulate other's comment or not as you are maintaining the website and relevant work at certain cost.
2. In my opinion there is no need for restraining CJI as he has not only right of freedom to speak but also to point out the facts to GOI fearlessly, as he has to act fearlessly, under pressure or threat. Both executive as well as judiciary must not interfere in each others' functioning. Moreover, independence of judiciary can be only maintained if they act fearlessly, impartially and judicially and not by apprehension that one segment or other segment or personalities like PM, CM, political chiefs would get annoyed.
3. However, reconciliation between judiciary and executive could be possible when both restrained themselves. NJCA was rejected / held illegal as there was provision for Minister of Law as one of the key player in appointment.
4. Article 124 (2) stipulates that "Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-five years: Provided that in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of India shall always be consulted.
5. No where the procedure of appointment of judges is stipulated therefore whether collegiums system or NJCA is better option is disputed. In fact, NJCA was better as far as transparency is concerned and executive has authority to appoint judges but NJCA has been declared as unconstitutional. This has aggravated the clash between judiciary and executive. As far as solution is concerned both executive and judiciary need to be restrained.
My views on issues being raised are summarized as follows:
| No. | Issue | My views or Comments |
| 1 | Remark of Grinding Halt and conflict Collegiums v NJAC | Since NJAC has been held unconstitutional, till new act is made GOI should allow collegiums system to function and allow appointment of judges to HCs and SC |
| 2 | Comments on PM's Speech on 15th August 2016 | Indeed as CJI it was expected to address at least briefly on problems of judiciary. Often judiciary is blamed for slow progress in disposal of cases without providing adequate judges. Also not accepting recommendations made by CJI tantamount to sabotaging functioning. |
| 3 | Law Minister's remarks | Indeed CJI of India is answerable to the President of India alone and Ministers are expected to assist CJI not order. |
| 4 | Transparency in appointment of judges | Yes, it is essential but it is under collegiums system it is not possible. Collegiums system was to replace by NJCA |
| 5 | Delays and workload | Unless adequate strength is provided workload cannot be reduced nor could delays be avoided. |
In view of the above, in my opinion there is no need for showing restraint by CJI as delays in appointment judges based on recommendations made by the collegiums system, tantamount undermine the authority of CJI, which causes frustration, and such frustration needs some vent for airing grievances. There is hardly any case for taking note of petty incidents.
In view of the above, in my opinion there is no need for showing restraint as frustration needs some vent for airing grievances.
Dr. Ratnakar Gedam
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.