What are the implications of Judiciary losing fresh talent to government's silence and segregation of names

The implications of the Judiciary losing fresh talent to the government's silence and segregation of names are as follows: 1. Lack of diversity: By segregating names and not disclosing them, the government can potentially limit diversity within the judiciary. This can lead to a lack of representation and a bias in decision-making. 2. Decreased intellectual capital: The loss of bright, young minds in the judiciary can result in a decreased pool of intellectual capital. This can hinder the judiciary's ability to adapt to evolving legal challenges and make informed judgments. 3. Inefficiency in the judiciary: Fresh talent brings new perspectives, innovative ideas, and a critical analysis that can contribute to the efficiency of the judiciary. By losing such talent, the judiciary may struggle to keep up with the evolving legal landscape, leading to delays in justice delivery. 4. Erosion of public confidence: The government's silence and segregation of names can raise questions about transparency and accountability. This can erode public confidence in the judiciary, affecting its overall credibility and legitimacy. 5. Loss of talent to other sectors: If the judiciary is perceived as unwelcoming or lacking opportunities for growth, talented individuals may choose to pursue careers in alternative sectors, depriving the judiciary of potential future leaders. Overall, the consequences of the judiciary losing fresh talent to the government's silence and segregation of names can have far-reaching implications on the effectiveness and legitimacy of the judicial system.