In a program, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said that collegium system is the best system available now. The purpose of this system was to preserve liberty, which is a core value. Former Chief Justice UU Lalit also called it an ‘ideal system’ for the appointment of judges in the apex court and high courts.
CJI DY Chandrachud. (Photo: PTI)
New Delhi: Chief Justice of India Justice DY Chandrachud has said in defense of the collegium system of appointing judges that not every system is perfect, but it is the best system developed by the judiciary. It is to be known that the collegium system has been a major cause of dispute between the central government and the judiciary for a long time.
Speaking at the ‘India Today Conclave 2023’, the CJI said that the purpose of the collegium system is to preserve independence and this can be done by isolating it from external influences.
The Hindu According to, CJI Chandrachud said, ‘As the Chief Justice, I have to keep the system as it has been given to us. I am not saying that every system is perfect, but this is the best system that we have developed.
He said, ‘The purpose of this system was to maintain freedom, which is a core value. If the judiciary has to be independent, then we have to separate the judiciary from outside influences. This is the inherent feature of the collegium.
Amid the tussle between the government and the judiciary, the CJI also responded to Law Minister Kiren Rijiju, who expressed displeasure over the government’s reasons for not approving names recommended by the Supreme Court collegium for appointment as judges of constitutional courts.
The CJI said, ‘He has a perception. I have a belief and there is bound to be a difference of opinion and what is the harm in having a difference of opinion? We have to deal with perceptions within the judiciary as well. I dare to say that there is a difference of opinion even within the government.
He further said that I do not want to get involved in a dispute with the Law Minister because of his perception. I respect his belief and I am sure he also has respect for ours.
He further said, the reason why we have put these (reasons for rejecting the names of judges recommended by the government) on the website of the Supreme Court is that the present collegium wants to address the criticism that it is said that We are not transparent and we believe that opening up of processes will lead to greater trust among citizens.
‘Sexual orientation of a candidate for appointment as a judge does not have any bearing on his ability’, says CJI on controversy over Collegium’s recommendation to appoint senior gay advocate Saurabh Kirpal as Delhi High Court judge even after government rejects it Has nothing to do with.
Significantly, in the month of January, the Supreme Court collegium had reiterated the recommendation of Saurabh Kirpal’s name, despite the government rejecting it in November 2021, citing his homosexuality as the reason.
When asked how independent is India’s judiciary and whether there is any pressure from the government, the CJI said there is no pressure from the government on how to decide cases.
He said, ‘In my 23 years of being a judge, no one told me how to decide a case. I don’t even talk to a colleague presiding over a case and ask what is going on in that case. There are some lines that we draw for ourselves. This is part of our training.
The CJI said, ‘There is no question of pressure from the executive power of the government. I hope I am speaking for the rest of the system as well. The decision of the Election Commission is proof that there is no pressure on the judiciary.
On the issue of 4.32 crore cases pending before the judiciary, he said that it is true that the number of pending cases is huge, but it shows the faith of the people in coming to the courts for justice.
He also pointed to the lack of infrastructure in the judiciary behind the pendency of cases. Along with this, it was also said that the number of judges should be reduced in proportion to the population.
He said that we need to completely modernize the Indian judiciary. Our model for judicial administration is based on the colonial model, which we inherited from the British.
On the issue of trolling of apex court judges on social media, the Chief Justice said it was important not to be swayed by the din of extremist views.
He said that every word spoken in the court is being tweeted live and it puts a heavy burden on us as well.
Several opposition MPs recently asked President Draupadi Murmu to take immediate action on social media trolling of CJI Chandrachud when he was deliberating on a matter related to the role of the governor in Maharashtra during the formation of the Eknath Shinde government. Were.
Collegium system is ideal for appointment of judges: Former CJI UU Lalit
Against the backdrop of Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju questioning the collegium system, former Chief Justice of India UU Lalit also on Saturday described the collegium system as the ‘ideal system’ for appointment of judges to the apex court and high courts in the country.
CJI UU Lalit. (Photo: PTI)
The Hindu According to K, like the current CJI, he also said in ‘India Today Conclave’ that the judiciary is completely independent from the executive.
Citing grass-root level vetting of a person before selection as a judge, he said, “According to me, the collegium system is the ideal system. You have individuals whose full profile is viewed by the High Court. Not by 1-2 individuals but repeatedly as an institution.
Justice Lalit said that ‘the system is designed for the best possible talent’ and not all recommendations of the High Court are accepted.
He also spoke on the issue of Saurabh Kirpal and said that it was not the collegium’s fault for not being able to appoint him, the fault was elsewhere.
Justice Lalit further said that he does not agree that the courts are becoming ‘executive courts’ and said that it is very easy for an outsider to criticize, people jump in to make statements.
He said, ‘All the courts are quite independent and you will actually see that in this process as well. Two cases came before me – Siddiq Kappan and Teesta Setalvad – both were released on bail. Another case was of Vinod Dua, he was also given relief in the case. The third case was of Varavara Rao, we gave relief to him too.
He said, ‘We immediately jump to make generalized statements. It’s not like that. The courts are completely independent. It is very difficult for judges and very easy for someone from outside to criticize.
read this also…
Categories: India, Special
