SC judge makes 'ants' remark on collegium appointments
What's the story
Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has called for more transparency in the collegium system of judicial appointments. He argued that not disclosing reasons for such appointments denies deserving judges their due recognition and could let people with "wholly unconstitutional" views enter the judiciary. "By withholding reasons, we also create space for individuals to enter the judiciary who may later describe groups of people as 'ants,'" he said at a panel discussion.
Transparency argument
Bhuyan advocates for public debate on judicial appointments
Justice Bhuyan emphasized that not giving reasons for judicial appointments does a disservice to outstanding judges.
He argued that more disclosure and discussion could prevent the elevation of individuals with views contrary to constitutional values.
"What harm is caused if there is informed public debate on such decisions?" he asked, advocating for transparency in the appointment and transfer of judges.
Transparency concerns
Justice calls out recent shift in collegium statements
Justice Bhuyan also highlighted the lack of transparency in judicial appointments and transfers.
He noted that deliberations over these matters remain confidential and reasons for rejecting or deferring recommendations are rarely disclosed.
"Deliberations over the elevation and transfer of judges remain confidential; reasons for rejecting or deferring a recommendation are rarely disclosed in full," he said, calling attention to a recent shift in Supreme Court collegium statements.
Accountability issue
Who watches the watchmen? Justice Bhuyan asks
Justice Bhuyan also questioned accountability within the judiciary, asking, "Who watches the watchmen?"
He noted a contrast between a judiciary that has embraced greater openness in its adjudicative role and one that remains guarded about its institutional processes.
The Supreme Court collegium system, which recommends appointments and transfers in the higher judiciary, has been a controversial point due to its lack of transparency.
System debate
Critics slam collegium system, judiciary defends it
Critics have long slammed the collegium system for its lack of transparency and absence of publicly accessible criteria governing appointments.
However, the judiciary defends it as necessary to protect judicial independence from executive interference.
The issue has led to friction between the judiciary and government, with Parliament seeking to replace it with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), a law the Supreme Court struck down in 2015, holding that it undermined judicial independence.