The Chief Justice of India has taken a principled stand on the process of appointment of judges to the Supreme Court. In upbraiding the government for not taking his consent on dropping the name of Gopal Subramanium from the list of four recommended by the collegium, the CJI has spelt out his disapproval. However, there is no face-off between the judiciary and the government since Mr Subramanium himself had withdrawn. Had the CJI broached the subject the moment media leaks started appearing on the doubts over the elevation of the former solicitor-general, a full-fledged war may have been fought over the independence of the judiciary.
The old system of the executive appointing judges to the Supreme Court was a disaster. Things have moved to the other end of the spectrum with the judiciary itself recommending the names through a collegium headed by the CJI and on which other senior judges serve. The consensus way could have been adopted had the proposed system of appointments through the Judicial Appointments Accountability Bill become law; this would have made the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition part of a more inclusive process of recommendations and appointments.
The reform bill got stuck in the Upper House during the previous government’s tenure. Unless there is political will now to back a truer consensus process, the present system will hold sway and the chances of the judiciary’s independence being subverted cannot be ruled out. It is time for serious discussion on finding an ideal way to appoint judges.
