AUTHOR NAME:RAMA AARTHI.J
COURSE: B.A.,LL.B
ABSTRACT:
The article is about the collegium system in India which remains a debate and discussion with ongoing calls for the reform to addressing its prerecorded shortcomings and enhance its effectiveness And transparency and the importance of collegium system. This system 8n judiciary Is not known by citizen. There are many critics based on precedent and judicial review.
INTRODUCTION:
Basically A collegium system is a set Up in the judiciall which is a method used in the appointment and transfer of judges in the Supreme court and High court ¹. This process is undertaken by the cheif Justice of India. The collegium recommendations are sent to the government which has a limited role in the selection. This system.ensure Judicial independence by insulting the appointment process from political interference. The system is seen as a way to maintain a balance of power between the judiciary and executive.
EVOLUTION OF COLLEGIUM SYSTEM:
This concept evolved from three judges cases namely Judges transfer case ²,
Supreme court Advocates and record.vs Union of India ³, In re special reference 1 of 1998.
Over the course of the three cases, the court evolved the principle of judicial independence to mean that no other branch of the state, including the legislature and the executive, would have any say in the appointment of judges. The court then created the collegium system, which has been in use since the judgment in the second Judges Case was issued in 1993. The third Judges Case is not a case but an opinion delivered by the Supreme Court responding to a question of law regarding the collegium system, raised by then President of India K. R. Narayanan, in July 1998 under his constitutional powers. There is no explicit mention of the collegium either in the original Constitution of India or in any successive amendments.
In January 2013, the court dismissed as without locus standi, a public interest litigation filed by NGO Suraz India Trust that sought to challenge the collegium system of appointment⁴,while in July, then Chief Justice P. Sathasivam spoke against any attempts to change the collegium system.⁵
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS:
ARTICLE 124:
Supreme Court judges should appoint by president after consulate sub judges of High Court ans Supreme court as the president may deemed necessary, the CJI is to be consulted in all appointment except his or her.
ARTICLE 217:
High court judge can be appointed by president after consultation with such CJI and governor deem necessary.
DEBATE ON COLLEGIUM SYSTEM:
The debate over the Collegium system in India highlights the tension between ensuring judicial independence and promoting transparency and accountability in judicial appointments. While the Collegium system has its defenders, critics continue to raise concerns about its lack of transparency and potential for bias. Any potential reforms would need to carefully balance these competing considerations.
CAN PARILAMENT OVERICLE ON JUDGES APPOINTMENT:
No, the Indian Parliament cannot directly override the appointment of judges. While Parliament has the power to enact laws related to the appointment process, including the establishment of a Judicial Appointments Commission, the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, asserting that it impinged upon judicial independence. This means that the final say on judicial appointments, while influenced by the recommendations of the collegium (or a future commission), ultimately rests with the judiciary itself.
The NJAC Act, which aimed to create a commission for judicial appointments with representation from the executive and legislature, was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015.
CRITICISM:
Opaque and Unaccountable: No formal records or transparency in decision-making. Favouritism and Nepotism: Risk of judicial appointments based on personal networks.
CONCLUSION:
The Collegium system, while crucial for judicial independence, faces criticism regarding transparency, accountability, and diversity. While it has protected the judiciary from political interference, concerns about nepotism, delays, and lack of public access to information persist. Reforms are needed to strike a balance between judicial independence and public trust
