Trisha Aggarwal, Amity University, Uttar Pradesh (Amity Law School, Noida)
ABSTRACT
In 2014, the National Judicial Appointments Commission was established to oversee the appointment of judges to higher judiciary, effectively replacing the longstanding collegium system. This shift aimed to enhance judicial independence and transfer appointment powers from the executive to the judiciary. However, despite its theoretical fairness, concerns about nepotism persisted within this framework. The collegium system had been criticized for its lack of transparency and accountability.
In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC1, citing its potential threat to judicial independence. The ruling underscored the need for a judiciary free from favoritism and vested interests. The paper examines the constitutional grounds declaring the NJAC as unconstitutional, while also addressing the issues at hand. It advocates for a transparent appointment process inspired by practices in other jurisdictions.
The paper contends that the Supreme Court should have scrutinized the NJAC’s provisions more thoroughly, suggesting that only unconstitutional elements be removed while preserving beneficial aspects of judicial appointments.
Comentários