Editor's Pick: SC to eventually list plea for Collegium system review

On Thursday, the Chief Justice of India, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, agreed to list a writ petition in due course to reconsider the Collegium system of appointments and revive the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). The Collegium system has been criticised by Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju for being “opaque” and by the petitioners for being a “synonym for nepotism and favouritism”. Read about the issues with the collegium here. The judiciary has, however, argued in the past that the Collegium system keeps the selection of judges free from political interference, protects judicial independence, and contains sufficient checks and balances. The Collegium is a system where the Chief Justice of India and four senior-most judges recommend appointments and transfers of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. It has been in existence since 1993. The President has the power to appoint judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts after “consultation” with certain persons. In 1993, the word ‘consultation’ was interpreted by the Supreme Court as “concurrence”, which essentially meant that the executive was bound by the advice of the judiciary in the matter of appointments and transfers. This led the Parliament to amend the Constitution in 2014 and enact the NJAC Act to substitute the Collegium with the NJAC. The NJAC was a body comprising members of the judiciary, the executive, and eminent persons. It was perceived by many to be a more transparent body, reflecting the will of the people. However, in 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC Act as “unconstitutional and void” on the plea that it would affect the independence of the judiciary. The Court declared that the judiciary cannot risk being caught in a “web of indebtedness” to the government. The Collegium system thus continued and, in the petitioner’s words, “has resulted in the denial of equal opportunity for the petitioners and thousands of lawyers who are eligible, meritorious and who deserve to be considered.” An editorial last year also said about the Collegium, “Decisions that have no explanation, or can only be explained in terms of one’s own perception about the functioning of the judge affected by it, have become quite common”. Recently, Sriram Panchu argued that there is no seat in the Collegium for a non-judge, which means that there is “no one to offer suggestions or raise questions or even observe what is going on.” As the question of appointments and transfers of judges is crucial in the administration of justice, this story is the top pick of the day. Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Head over to our newsletter subscription page to sign up for Editor‘s Pick and more. Click here. The Hindu’s Editorials Trade tumult: On shrinking exports Comeback bid: On Donald Trump The Hindu’s Daily News Quiz Which of the following nations is part of the BASIC group that has objected to carbon border taxes? Brazil Chile Argentina Russia To know the answer and to take the quiz, click here. [logo] Editor's Pick 18 NOVEMBER 2022 [The Hindu logo] In the Editor's Pick newsletter, The Hindu explains why a story was important enough to be carried on the front page of today's edition of our newspaper. [Arrow]( [Open in browser]( [Mail icon]( [More newsletters]( SC to eventually list plea for Collegium system review On Thursday, the Chief Justice of India, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, agreed to list a writ petition in due course [to reconsider the Collegium system of appointments and revive the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)](. The Collegium system has been criticised by Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju for being “opaque” and by the petitioners for being a “synonym for nepotism and favouritism”. Read about the issues with the collegium [here](. The judiciary has, however, argued in the past that the Collegium system keeps the selection of judges free from political interference, protects judicial independence, and contains sufficient checks and balances.  The Collegium is a system where the Chief Justice of India and four senior-most judges recommend appointments and transfers of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. It has been in existence since 1993. The President has the power to appoint judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts after “consultation” with certain persons. In 1993, the word ‘consultation’ was interpreted by the Supreme Court as “concurrence”, which essentially meant that the executive was bound by the advice of the judiciary in the matter of appointments and transfers. This led the Parliament to amend the Constitution in 2014 and enact the NJAC Act to substitute the Collegium with the NJAC. The NJAC was a body comprising members of the judiciary, the executive, and eminent persons. It was perceived by many to be a more transparent body, reflecting the will of the people. However, in 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC Act as “unconstitutional and void” on the plea that it would affect the independence of the judiciary. The Court declared that the judiciary cannot risk being caught in a “web of indebtedness” to the government. The Collegium system thus continued and, in the petitioner’s words, “has resulted in the denial of equal opportunity for the petitioners and thousands of lawyers who are eligible, meritorious and who deserve to be considered.” [An editorial last year also said]( the Collegium, “Decisions that have no explanation, or can only be explained in terms of one’s own perception about the functioning of the judge affected by it, have become quite common”. Recently, [Sriram Panchu argued]( that there is no seat in the Collegium for a non-judge, which means that there is “no one to offer suggestions or raise questions or even observe what is going on.” As the question of appointments and transfers of judges is crucial in the administration of justice, this story is the top pick of the day. Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Head over to our newsletter subscription page to sign up for Editor‘s Pick and more. [Click here.]( The Hindu’s Editorials [Arrow][Trade tumult: On shrinking exports]( [Arrow][Comeback bid: On Donald Trump]( The Hindu’s Daily News Quiz Which of the following nations is part of the BASIC group that has objected to carbon border taxes? - Brazil - Chile - Argentina - Russia To know the answer and to take the quiz, [click here.]( Today’s Best Reads [[Vikram-S, India’s first private rocket, lifts off from ISRO spaceport] Vikram-S, India’s first private rocket, lifts off from ISRO spaceport]( [[Stalker indiscriminately slashes hotel employee across her face in Chennai, arrested] Stalker indiscriminately slashes hotel employee across her face in Chennai, arrested]( [[Farooq Abdullah to step down as National Conference president] Farooq Abdullah to step down as National Conference president]( [[Isn’t reservation for the poor a good thing? | The Hindu Parley podcast] Isn’t reservation for the poor a good thing? | The Hindu Parley podcast]( Copyright @ 2022, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](