SC May Consider Plea to Revive NJAC and End Collegium System: CJI

Context:
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) stated that the Supreme Court may consider a plea seeking revival of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) and discontinuation of the existing Collegium system for judicial appointments. The oral observation comes amid ongoing debates on transparency, accountability, and constitutional validity of appointment mechanisms in higher judiciary.

Key Highlights

Background and Current Petition

• A petition has been filed urging:
  • Revival of NJAC
  • Termination of the Collegium system
• The petitioner argued that the current system lacks transparency and is perceived as opaque and favour-driven.
• Permission has reportedly been granted to argue the matter in person.

Supreme Court’s Observations

• The CJI acknowledged the plea and stated the court “may consider” it.
• The court also noted ongoing concerns regarding delays and secrecy surrounding appointments.

Historic Legal Milestones

• 1993 (Second Judges Case):
  • Collegium system evolved from SC judgment recognizing judiciary primacy in appointments.
• 2014:
  • Parliament passed the 99th Constitutional Amendment establishing NJAC.
• 2015:
  • SC struck down the amendment and NJAC Act as unconstitutional, terming it violative of judicial independence (part of basic structure doctrine).

Debate on Collegium vs. NJAC

• NJAC was meant to ensure:
  • Broader representation (judiciary + executive + eminent persons)
  • Accountability
• Critics argue Collegium is:
  • Opaque
  • Lacking clear procedures
  • Lacking external checks

Relevant Prelims Points

• Collegium System:
  • A judicially created mechanism where judges recommend appointments and transfers in higher judiciary.
  • No mention in the Constitution.
• Constitutional Provisions:
  • Articles 124 & 217 — Appointment of SC and HC judges by the President.
  • Basic Structure Doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati Case) prevents Parliament from altering judicial independence.
• 99th Constitutional Amendment + NJAC Act (2014):
  • Proposed body included:
    • CJI + 2 senior judges
    • Law Minister
    • 2 eminent persons

Relevant Mains Points

• Judicial Independence vs. Executive Overreach:
  • Courts struck down NJAC on grounds it diluted judicial autonomy.
• Transparency and Accountability:
  • Collegium criticized for:
    • Lack of recorded reasons
    • No structured criteria
    • Limited diversity in appointments
• Judicial Reforms Debate:
  • Parliamentary standing committees, civil society, and legal scholars demand:
    • Public scrutiny of judicial appointments
    • Clear timelines and eligibility parameters
    • Institutional oversight

Way Forward

• Possible options include:
  • Modified NJAC model preserving judicial independence.
  • Codifying Collegium processes through legislation or constitutional rules.
  • Independent oversight body with fixed framework and grievance redressal.

UPSC Relevance:

• GS-II: Judiciary, Constitutional Amendments, Judicial Independence, Separation of Powers
• Polity (Prelims): NJAC, Collegium System, Articles 124 & 217, Basic Structure Doctrine
• GS-IV: Ethics in Governance, Transparency, Accountability