Selection of judges lacks transparency: ex-CJ
HERALD REPORTER
PANJIM, NOV 13
Former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court Ajit Prakash Shah has alleged that the Indian judiciary lacks transparency while selecting judges.
“Our current appointment system is out of step with democratic culture primarily because it lacks transparency, and provides for no oversight,” former Justice Shah said while addressing a two-day seminar on ‘Strengthening Democracy: Role of Judiciary,’ organised by the International Centre Goa (ICG), Media Information and Communication Centre of India (MICCI) and Friedrich Ebert Foundation-India in association with the Goa High Court Bar Association.
Speaking further, Shah said that the way in which judges are appointed in the country embody a set of values about democracy.
“Choosing judges based on undisclosed criterion in largely unknown circumstances, reflects an increasing democratic deficit,” he added.
He believes that the country can learn from systems elsewhere, which have managed to provide a transparent process of appointment while maintaining judicial independence.
Shah cited various examples of nations like UK and South Africa, where appointments are transparent and independent.
Shah further lamented that in India there are less than five per cent of the female judges on various benches.
“This amounts to mockery of equal rights and gender justice,” Shah stated.
“The judiciary, which does not make up of the society from which it is drawn will sooner or later lose the confidence of that society,” he added.
During the inaugural function, which was also attended by Assembly Speaker Pratapsing Rane, the former chief justice presented a paper on ‘Accountability in the Indian Judiciary: The emerging debate’, compiled by him and legal expert Anirudh Wadhwa.
While delivering the keynote address, Shah expressed unhappiness over the proposed Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010 as he feels that the bill gives an example of the ‘cure being worse than the disease’.
According to him, the bill presents a stark tension between judicial independence and accountability.
“Under this bill even a minor breach of judicial standards like not filing assets information in time could constitute misconduct,” he pointed out stating that the idea of minor punishments is unworkable and has the potential to seriously undermine judicial status.
“If sitting judges are publicly censured but are still sitting on the bench and are deciding case then this damages the credibility of the entire system. In such cases only binary system of punishment can work,” Shah said.
“Either the judge is guilty and must be impeached or if he is not, then no action must be taken against him,” he added.
Shah said that under the proposed act the Oversight Committee, to whom the complaints against the judges are forwarded, led by Vice President of India and Chief Justice of India just act as post office and refers each complaint to the scrutiny panel.
He also raised objection to the composition of scrutiny committee, which will consist of three members, two of whom will be judges sitting in the same court as the judge against whom the complaint is made.
“Since these judges would be colleagues sitting in the same court, it is likely that this will, either way, influence their conduct,” Shah added.
Earlier, Shah applauded Indian judiciary for being the most powerful judiciary in the world.
“The Indian Supreme Court has been the protector of citizens’ liberty and has shown active concern about the rights of detainees and under trials,” he stated.
Rane in his opening remark, urged the judges not to accept any cases in the court without proper scrutiny.
“Millions of cases are pending in Supreme Court, High Courts as well as in the lower courts as the judges have no time and the lawyers are interested in dragging it,” he alleged.
