Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi, Jan 14: Continuing to voice his opinion regarding the Collegium System on public forums, Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju recently said that the collegium system to appoint judges, which is an administrative job, is keeping the judges ‘extremely busy’ taking away their precious time, thereby adversely impacting their duties as judges.
The Union Law Minister also said that in the year 1993, in the Second Judges case, the constitutional provisions were undone by the Supreme Court by creating the collegium system.
He also added that the Constitution of India was very clear that the Judges should not be involved in the appointment process (of Judges) except for the consultation, to be carried by the executive by seeking their opinion, however, now the Judiciary is fully involved in the appointment process of the Judges.
For context, he was referring to the Apex Court’s ruling in the case of Second Judges case (1993), which introduced the Collegium System and ruled that the word “consultation” in Article 124 of the Constitution of India means “concurrence” and therefore, the President of India was bound to make a decision (on the appointment of Judges) based on the consultation of the Supreme Court.
“If Judges are involved in identifying the next judges, which is an administrative job, it will definitely have an adverse impact on their duty as a judge. Collegium System has kept the senior judges extremely busy in picking the next judges”: Union Law Minister.
The Union Law Minister was giving an interview to ‘News On AIR’ (All India Radio) wherein he was asked to give his opinion regarding the problems with the Collegium System.
“The main problem with regard to the appointment of the Judges is lack of understanding, among the Judiciary and other stakeholders, of the spirit of the Constitution…The Constitution is very clear that the president of India shall appoint judges in consultation with the Chief Justice…There could be some consultations with other stakeholders…In 1993, in the Second Judges case, the Supreme Court undone the Constitutional Provisions and created the Collegium System,” Union Law Minister Rijiju said.
Significantly, he also said that as long as the Collegium System is prevailing, the Government will abide by it, however, he added, sometimes questions arise with regard to the Memorandum Of Procedure, which is an agreement between the judiciary and the government containing a set of guidelines for making appointments to the Supreme Court and High Court.
He said that if Supreme Court tries to change or dilute the MOP, through judgment, then it will be a problem for the Government and that the Government is requesting the Supreme Court, not to do the same.
These statements from the Union Law Minister come amidst the ongoing differences between the Central Government and the Judiciary over the procedure to appoint judges in the higher judiciary. In fact, the Supreme Court recently expressed its disapproval of the comments made by the government functionaries against the collegium system.
While hearing a contempt petition filed by the Advocates Association of Bangalore against the Centre for breaching the timeline for judicial appointments, the Supreme Court had expressed disapproval of the comments made by the government functionaries against the collegium system.
It may be noted that recently, on at least 3 occasions, Union Law and Justice Minister Kiren Rijiju has launched attacks against the Collegium System by calling it opaque and Unaccountable,alien to the constitution of India, and not backed by the citizens.
ALSO READ: SC constitutes ‘case categorisation advisory Committee’ headed by Justice PS Narasimha
It may further be noted that the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar recently made critical comments about the Supreme Court’s judgment which overturned the Constitutional Amendment passed to bring in the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).
Flagging the issue of ten recommendations made by the Collegium regarding the transfer of High Court judges remaining pending with the Central Government, the Supreme Court last week said that such delays by the government gives rise to an impression that there is ‘third party interference’ on behalf of these judges with the government.
Regarding the MOP, the Supreme Court recently clarified that the issue pertaining to the existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for the appointment of judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court has been settled and ought to be complied with.
(Courtesy: LiveLaw)
