There is something indecent and obnoxious in the manner of the government seeking greater authority in the appointment of judges to the constitutional courts. The latest salute is from Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju, who has written to the Chief Justice of India to request that the executive be given a role in the appointment process, which is now being handled by a collegium of judges. Reports say the minister is looking to set up a search-and-evaluation committee with government representatives to suggest names to the collegium for appointments to the high courts and the Supreme Court. He is learned to have demanded a representative of the central government in the Supreme Court collegium and a representative of the state government in the high court collegium. The letter comes as the latest in a series of official pronouncements against the judiciary. Shri Rijiju has been at the forefront of this attack, repeatedly questioning the collegium system correctly highlighting some of accepted the blame, There is no doubt that the government’s anger is towards the government Constitution bench decision of 2015 Cancellation of constitution of National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). While few would disagree that the collegium system needs reform, the intention of the government to launch a campaign against the judiciary in the name of demanding reforms in the process of appointments is questionable.
The answers to some of the issues raised by the government are quite simple, and have been pointed out time and again by the Court as well as the political opposition. It may address the need for a more transparent and independent process by making a new legislative effort to establish a neutral mechanism that does not encroach on the independence of the judiciary. Until such an exercise to amend the constitution succeeds, it will have to follow the law of the land, that is, the existing system of appointments through the collegium. It is difficult to avoid the impression that the government’s strategy is based on veiled warnings: deliberately delaying action on recommendations; ignoring repeated names even after considering them several times; And are running a campaign to make the institution illegal. It is surprising that it seeks to rein in the judiciary which in recent years has been quite responsive to the government’s concerns on the judicial side. The only conclusion is that the present regime wants complete control over who becomes judges in this country. A system of checks and balances that prevent any one branch from dominating is essential to democratic functioning.