Analysing The Tussle Between Legislature And Judiciary Related To Appointment Of Judges (Collegium Vs NJAC)
Ananya Chandra, NMIMS, School of Law
ABSTRACT
The appointment of judges in India has always been a topic of debate and contention between the legislature and judiciary. The Constitution of India gives the power to appoint judges to the President, who exercises it in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and other senior judges. However, in 1993, the Supreme Court of India, in the case of "Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association vs Union of India", introduced the "Collegium System" for appointing judges. Under this system, the ChiefJustice of India and a group of senior judges make recommendations to the President for the appointment of judges.
The Collegium System was challenged in 2015, when the Parliament passed the "National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act", which aimed to create a new body for the appointment of judges, comprising of both judges and non-judges. However, the NJAC Act was challenged in the Supreme Court, and in 2015, the Supreme Court declared the NJAC Act unconstitutional and upheld theCollegium System. The tussle between the legislature and judiciary over the appointment of judges is a result of a clash of powers and functions. The Constitution of India has clearly defined the roles and responsibilities of thethree branches of government, namely the executive, legislature, and judiciary. The appointment of judges falls under the executive function, but the judiciary has been given the responsibility to interpretthe Constitution and ensure its proper implementation.
The judiciary's role in the appointment of judges through the Collegium System has been seen as an encroachment of the executive's power, as it effectively gives the judiciary the power to appoint judges. On the other hand, the judiciary has argued that the Collegium System is necessary to maintain the independence of the judiciary and ensure the selection of competent judges. The NJAC Act was seen as an attempt by the legislature to take control of the appointment process and undermine the independenceof the judiciary.
The tussle between the legislature and judiciary over the appointment of judges highlights the need for adelicate balance of powers and functions among the branches of government. While the judiciary must be independent and free from political interference, it must also recognize the importance of the separation of powers and respect the executive's authority in certain areas. Similarly, the legislature mustrespect the judiciary's role in interpreting the Constitution, while also ensuring that its own powers are not undermined.
Comments