Months after quashing the contentious National Judicial Appointment Commission law, it seems like the Supreme Court is all set for another face-off with the government. This time, it is over the Centre’s attempts at bringing transparency in judges’ appointment.
Two Supreme Court judges have told The Telegraph “that the government’s latest suggestions are as damaging for judicial independence as the law set aside last October.”
The reports says that the following suggestions, by the Centre, are likely to be rejected:
- Allowing the Centre the right to reject any judge on the ground of national security (the government can now merely seek a reconsideration).
- Giving the attorney-general and the state advocates-general a say in appointments and transfers of judges.
- Elevating advocates directly to the top court, with three such judges in office at any given time (advocates now have to be appointed high court judges first).
- Sharing with the government any dissent note filed within the collegium.
An apex court judge said.
ADVERTISEMENTREMOVE AD
What the Judges Think
We are examining the suggestions but some of them seem to override the (October) judgment, which is not acceptable.
As for sharing dissent notes, there’s never any dissent in our decisions. All decisions are taken unanimously by the judges in the collegium.
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)