CJI's exclusion from CEC selection panel raises fairness concerns: SC
What's the story
The Supreme Court has raised concerns over the exclusion of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) from a three-member panel for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs). The panel, constituted under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, includes only the Prime Minister, a Union Minister nominated by him, and the Leader of Opposition.
Fairness questioned
Should there be no show of fairness in process: SC
Hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the act, the SC questioned the CJI's exclusion, asking if there should be no show of fairness in the process.
The court pointed out that the CJI is part of other selection panels, like appointing the CBI director and Lokpal.
The bench inquired what could be the reason for keeping him out of the process of picking CEC and ECs, posts that are among the "most important for a democracy."
Defense presented
Trust in elected institutions must be maintained, says Mehta
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended this exclusion, arguing it would be wrong to assume "bad faith" on the part of selected officials because they have a majority in the selection procedure.
Mehta argued that doubting the Prime Minister's decisions undermines constitutional trust in elected institutions.
"If his decision is not to be trusted and...seen as necessarily a bad-faith exercise, then why not have provision that even while selecting his Cabinet, he must consult some former judge or outsider?" Mehta asked.
Mehta
'This is not adversarial'
Mehta further argued that the minute the court declares that the selection committee is not adequate, the wisdom of parliament is disputed.
"When the executive wants to participate in the selection of another organ, it becomes a question of the independence of another organ. Can it be said to the judiciary then that we will not trust your appointments because there is no outsider? This is not adversarial. I am just saying this as a student of law," Mehta said.
Judgment reserved
Supreme Court reserves judgment
The court, however, emphasized that while it trusts the Prime Minister, fairness should still be visibly demonstrated in such important appointments.
"The election commissioner is supposed to be an independent person. Should the committee not have any show of fairness? We are not saying fairness is not being achieved. But it has to be shown," Justice Datta said.
After hearing the arguments, the SC reserved its judgment on whether to refer the matter to a larger five-judge bench.