How does the process of appointing Supreme Court judges balance independence and accountability?
The recent swearing-in of Justices Alok Aradhe and Vipul M. Pancholi highlights the appointment process. I want to understand how this process ensures both judicial independence and public accountability.
The appointment of Supreme Court judges in India is a critical process designed to maintain the independence of the judiciary while ensuring accountability to the public. This process is outlined in the Constitution and has evolved through judicial interpretations and conventions.
- Role of the Executive and Judiciary:
- The President of India formally appoints Supreme Court judges, but this is done based on recommendations from the judiciary (the Collegium system).
- The Collegium, headed by the Chief Justice of India and comprising the four senior-most judges, selects candidates, limiting direct government influence and protecting judicial independence.
- Checks and Balances:
- The executive has a consultative role and can seek reconsideration of Collegium recommendations, but if the Collegium reiterates its choice, the appointment is generally finalized.
- This mechanism ensures that neither the judiciary nor the executive has absolute power, balancing independence with oversight.
- Transparency and Accountability:
- Although the Collegium system has been criticized for lack of transparency, recent steps such as publishing recommendations and reasons for selections aim to increase public accountability.
- Eligibility criteria like high integrity and experience are considered, ensuring only competent individuals are appointed.
- Security of Tenure:
- Once appointed, judges enjoy fixed tenure and can only be removed through a rigorous impeachment process by Parliament, safeguarding them from executive pressure and ensuring independence.
Answered
20 hours ago