21 Oct THE TUSSLE for appointing the Judges between Supreme Court and the Executive
THE TUSSLE for appointing the Judges between Supreme Court and the Executive
All you want to know about NJAC ( National Judicial Appointment Committee )
SC to Decide
1.After long suspense, the Bench of the Supreme Court has delivered its historic verdict on Friday on the Writ Petitions which challenged the constitutional validity of the Constitution (Ninety Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 .
2.Now lets explains the Act of 2014 made thereunder lead to the establishment of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (124 A) for the recommendation of the names of people for the appointment to be Judges of the Supreme Court and High Court.
3. As soon as the new law came out, the lawyers of the SC started gossiping on the likely outcome; will there one judgement or would there be separate judgements or would there be any fractious opinion, etc.
4 . Firstly,most of the people were of the opinion there will be three or more different opinions.
5. The NJAC WOULD consists of the following people. The NJAC will consist of 6 members: Chief Justice of India, two Supreme Court Judges, Law Minister of India, two eminent persons. The two eminent persons will be appointed by CJI, Prime Minister and the leader of Opposition.
Now coming to the judgement of Supreme Court with crux elements
SC Decides: Popular Mood Fails the Test of Constitutionality
The long verdict which ran into more than a thousand pages has been delivered by a bench consisting of five judges of the SC ending speculations.
2. Contrary to all the talks which were based on reading faces of judges, SC has by majority of 4 to 1 has put down the whole constitutional amendment and the ACT of Parliament which was discussing the establishment of the NJAC to select the judges for the SC and HC.
3. No doubt, very few people were expecting the SC to uphold the following constitutional amendment and setting up of the NJAC. However, the general view on the ground was that the SC might do the exercise of putting down or cutting down the provisions or cutting down some bad parts and allow the shortened NJAC to continue. But, instead of going for these submissions, SC has held that the entire ninety ninth constitutional amendment and NJAC Act as null and void.
4. The majority view as held by the Justices Khehar J (Lokur, Kurian and Goyal JJ) lays on a fact that the importance of judiciary in the choosing of the judges is enshrined in the basic structure of the constitution as held by the nine judges also in the year 1993 and as governed by the democratic nations. The executive has a role, but it is limited to providing the information or inputs. Hence they cannot be a part of final selection for judges is what we call Majority view holds as the requirement of constitutionalism. However, the minority view held by Justice Chslameshwar J looks at the issue with altogether different view by holding that – since two members of NJAC can block the appointment of an not worthy candidate, there is no violation of principle of primacy of judiciary because NJAC has three judges out of six members.