You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Is 'Judicial Independence' at stake?

    The 'Supreme Court Collegium' has recommended two names that of Ms. Indu Malhotra and Justice K.M. Joseph for appointment as Supreme Court judges. The recommendations were sent to the government in January, this year. The government after sitting over the file for three months, cleared the name of Ms. Indu Malhotra and asked the collegium to reconsider the other name.

    Incidentally Justice K.M.Joseph was responsible for the cancellation of central government rule in Uttarakhand in 2016. This is likely to give a message that the judges who rule against the government may face consequences. This will lower the trust the people have in the judicial system. The interference of the government in the judicial system is not good for the country. The judiciary is the main hope for the people as the government is the defendant in a majority of the cases. The action of the government is a blow to the judiciary which is an important pillar of the democracy.
  • #634855
    Exactly. The present Government at the Centre, is hugely responsible for this sorry state of affairs. How is that this Government, wants to undermine every single institution, with the Governors playing the game of the ruling party at the Centre? The disease now seems to be spreading to the judiciary too.

    For instance,. the present Governors of both Tamil Nadu, and Pondicherry, are playing dirty games, by interfering in Government affairs and bringing in pliable officials at various levels. They seem to doing the work of the Government, by, for example monitoring the progress of some scheme or the other. They are going far beyond their powers.

    If the judiciary is also gone, and if the judges are made to dance to the political masters day in and day out, the common man will be totally lost in the game. How to stop this growing menace is something that we all need to ponder about -- very urgently.

  • #634870
    These I would refer as cheap politics from the opposition parties.

    We better understand those & teach them while the time of casting our votes. And we can also work along with different platforms so that others are also make aware of it.

    These needs to get stopped.

  • #634878
    How can the actions of the government be referred as cheap politics from the opposition parties? How can one support the meddling of the government in the judiciary? The judiciary is the last hope for the citizens as in a majority of the cases the government happens to be the defendant. Yes, the time has come to set the things that went wrong. The government has to accept the recommendations if the collegium sends back the same recommendation. The action of the government has compromised the seniority of the judges. One has to look at the things in a pragmatic way.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #634880
    There may be genuine reasons also for the same. Why should we link the present actions with the past? Anyhow government also knows the rule that if the collegium sends again the same, they have to clear the name. This rule itself says the government may send back some names for more information and better explanation supporting the appointment. We can expect the collegium can give more and better explanation and recommend the same name. I don't think using the power vested in them is playing with the judicial system. I don't think that the action of the government is a blow to the judiciary which is an important pillar of the democracy. They exercised the power they have.
    always confident

  • #634922
    Yes it is the known fact that higher posts in the government are done at the behest of the great scrutiny as to the character of the person recommended for the post. A government can survive if it has confident people at the helm of affairs so that their orders and newly created laws are implemented and followed. Even in this case the government has taken out the past performance of the judge in question and rejected the plea. Every government in power wants to have "its people" in main jobs, so that the voice of the party at the seat of power is heard and followed. So there is no wrong in seeking another name. One more thing, when a new government gets elected we can find senior IAS , IPS and other officials of previous government meeting the proposed CM and exchange pleasantries and wishes. What for they should meet on the day of installation itself ?
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #634926
    Mr. Mohan, the appointment of Supreme Court Judge has an entirely different procedure. Judiciary is not for propagating the voice of the party in power. It is for doing justice not propaganda.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #634927
    Why to blame the present Government for everything? There were so many known and untold stories in the past. Better not to discuss such sensitive issues here as this would be a curtain-raiser for a serious debate like those in news channels. One Chief Minister of a state is now worried that the centre may initiate charges against him as he has revolted against the centre and the Leader of the Opposition of the same state pleads that the cases on him our at the behest of the then Central government as he revolted against the Supremo of the party under whose command the alliance was working. These two versions are expressive about the state of affairs in the country.

  • #634931
    The actions of the government always come under scanner as they affect our lives. Precedents cannot be the excuses for continuing the mistakes. The people expect betterment in the governance. Unlike the previous generations, the people are becoming aware of the happenings in the country. They are discussing and questioning. There may be some turbulence in the beginning but it will settle.
    The day to day affairs of the country does not remain static. They will be dynamic and will be discussed by any conscious person. This is a platform for educated people and I do not find anything wrong in discussing it here. The entire country is discussing many important things including the subject of this thread. Many eminent jurists of the past and the present spoke for and against in this matter. The present action is against the most important institution of the country and the hope of the people for justice. This not about political parties, religion or region. This is very important for the good of the public and public alone.

    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #634965
    If the government has to say yes to the names sent to them what is the fun in referring the names to them. Simple the persons responsible for selection can select and then inform all about the appointment. But it is the rule that the name is to be cleared by the government. Then automatically the government will use its discretion power and the present government acted as per law only and there is nothing to be panic on this. Every government will make use of its discretionary powers in getting the people selected for various posts. So I feel what the present government has done on this particular issue is not such a big violation which will make the judiciary system ineffective and take out its independence in working.
    always confident

  • #634968
    Mr.Rao, it seems you are unaware of the system of appointment of Supreme Court judges. The Collegium which consists of Chief Justice of India and four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, recommends the names to the government. The recommendations are binding on the government. The government may ask the Collegium to reconsider some or all the recommendations depending upon any objection it may have. The Collegium may or may not reconsider and sends the list again to the government. This the government has to accept. The President of India appoints the Supreme Court judges. The salaries are paid by the government.
    The main problem is that the government wants to have a say in the selection of the judges. This was denied by the Supreme Court already. The government constituted a National Judicial Appointment Committee(NJAC) and it was accepted by President India. The NJAC came into force from 13-04-2015. On 16-10-2015, the Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court struck down the NJAC as unconstitutional while delivering a judgment on petitions filed against it. All this clearly indicates the intentions of the government to have a say in the appointments. The major political parties Congress and BJP are for NJAC. The judgment was historical as it did not allow the government to have a hand in the appointments and subsequent political interference in the judicial system.
    It is the duty of every citizen to safeguard our judicial system which is the only hope as the voice of the people will be lost on the government and the executive. We have to condemn this attitude of the major political parties which want to curtail the independence of the judiciary. The reasons given by the government are not tenable. Many famous jurists of the past and present condemned this attitude.

    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #634985
    I am aware that if the name is sent again to the government, they have to say Yes to it. But they have the power send it back once for reconsidering the issue. So they have sent it. Let the Collegium see to the objection or remarks made by the government and take their own decision. Why should we think it is diluting Judicial system?
    always confident

  • #634988
    Just because of the power they have, the government cannot use it. The reasons cited by the government are in public domain and because of the feeble nature of the reasons cited only there are comments of interference. The same thing happened in 2014 in the case of Gopal Subrahmanyan recommendation for elevation to the post of Supreme Court judge. In that instance, Mr. Gopal Subrahmanyan withdrew his name very much pained by the attitude of the government. Frequent interference in the judiciary by the government is the cause of the worry.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #635001
    The news channels and papers have been debating about why and why not the executive arm exercising its view on judicial matters.

    As far as this SC appoint goes, it seems that there are more senior members (around 40 odd) who are ahead in terms of seniority for the appointment, the representations from one state would be more etc.

    But if the collegium stands it's ground, then the appointment is bound to go through. Whatever the outcome, if there are major fallouts between the legislative, judiciary and the executive arms of our Government, it just raises suspision and the trust in them slowly erodes.

  • Sign In to post your comments