How does the appointment of retired High Court judges as ad hoc junior judges impact the independence and morale of the judiciary?

The appointment of retired High Court judges as ad hoc junior judges has been suggested to address the problem of judicial vacancies and case pendency. However, this practice raises concerns regarding the independence and morale of the judiciary. These concerns are important to ensure the effective and impartial functioning of the judicial system.

• Impact on Judicial Independence:
  • Retired judges may feel beholden to the executive or judiciary authorities who appoint them, potentially affecting their impartiality and independence in decision-making.
  • The perception that retired judges are being used as stop-gap arrangements can undermine public confidence in the judiciary’s autonomy.
  • Such appointments may blur the line between permanent and temporary judges, affecting the constitutional mandate of an independent judiciary.
• Impact on Judicial Morale:
  • Retired judges serving as junior ad hoc judges may feel embarrassed or demotivated, especially if they are required to work under judges who were once their juniors.
  • This can lead to a sense of diminished dignity and respect for the office of a judge, affecting the overall morale within the judicial community.
  • Serving in a junior capacity after retirement may discourage experienced judges from accepting such roles, leading to inefficiency in the system.
• Effect on Judicial Functioning:
  • Frequent reliance on ad hoc appointments may create an impression of a temporary and unsettled bench, impacting the consistency and quality of judgments.
  • It may also delay the process of filling regular vacancies, as ad hoc appointments are seen as an easy alternative.