LIJDLR

Collegium system

APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES IN INDIA: TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THE COLLEGIUM DEBATE

Volume IV Issue II /

APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES IN INDIA: TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THE COLLEGIUM DEBATE Aditya Pal, JRF-Ph.D., Scholar at SICMSS, Rashtriya Raksha University, Gandhinagar (India) Dhriti Pragya, BBA LL. B, 2nd year, Student at SCLML, Rashtriya Raksha University, Gandhinagar (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.171 Judicial independence is the cornerstone of any constitutional democracy, be it that of India or anywhere else. Thereby the processes of appointment as well as removal of Judges has been a central topic of debate regarding separation of powers as propound by Montesquieu. This paper critically examines the constitutional framework overseeing judicial appointments under the ambit of Articles 124 and 217 and the removal of these judges through impeachment procedure under clause (4) of Article 124 and the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968. This paper further traces the ‘evolution’ trajectory of the now hotly debated ‘Collegium system’ from Sankalchand Seth Case to all the way over the 4 landmark cases involving the issue of ‘consultation whether amounts to concurrent’ and the creation of a Collegium, which are famously known as the ‘Judges Cases’. The study underpins the tension between judicial independence and democratic accountability. It also takes into account the ‘comparative perspective’ from the United States of America, United Kingdom and South Africa for understanding the need for transparency and involving the relevant stakeholders through participation in the appointment process. This paper further explores the reformatory proposals which are comprised of statutory codification of the appointment procedure of Judges; Disclosing the entire reasoning behind candidature on digital platforms; Reimagining the NJAC with apt safeguards. By positing India’s experience with that of the USA, UK and South Africa, this study argues for a nuanced approach towards reforms while maintaining a fine balance between Judicial independence and accountability so as to ensure Judicial legitimacy.

APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES IN INDIA: TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THE COLLEGIUM DEBATE Read More »

SAFEGUARDING THE GUARDIAN: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE ON JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Volume IV Issue II /

SAFEGUARDING THE GUARDIAN: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE ON JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE Nishchal Kumawat, LL.M., Student at Gujarat National Law University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.154 Progressing from the question ‘Why is the independence of the judiciary necessary?’ to ‘How to make the judiciary independent?’ The constitutional discourse has rightly shifted to ‘How to keep the judiciary independent?’ The Aristotelian idea of separating functions has, to some extent, protected the independence of the judiciary vis-à-vis the executive and the legislature, but in the present, threats to the judiciary’s independence have become more varied and eclectic. These threats not only arise from the other two organs of government but also from the people and the nation’s politics. Modern constitutions around the world have acknowledged this and sought to insulate the judiciary from pernicious influences. A comparative study of different constitutional mechanisms enables us to identify both common and country-specific threats to the independence of the judiciary and learn from their experiences in mitigating them. This paper compares the constitutions of India, Thailand, Germany, and France, utilising the geographical and institutional diversity of their systems to achieve a richer comparison. The paper analyses the Constitutional texts, Relevant Legal statutes, Key committee reports, and various Case laws to get an objective view of the issue, untainted by the opinionated debates surrounding it. The end goal is to contribute to the rich discourse on the subject by identifying the glaring issues and the best practices for their resolution. In India, debates over the opacity of the collegium system, post-retirement appointments, and judicial accountability have intensified. Focusing on India, the paper will suggest practical and effective solutions to strengthen the independence of the judiciary and help in mitigating various threats arising from not only the other two organs of the government, the legislature, and the executive, but also from the people, the media and the politics of the country.

SAFEGUARDING THE GUARDIAN: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE ON JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE Read More »

UNDERSTANDING THE INDIAN COLLEGIUM SYSTEM: A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW

Volume 1 Issue IV /

UNDERSTANDING THE INDIAN COLLEGIUM SYSTEM: A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW Mudit Naveen, Student at The ICFAI Law School, The ICFAI University, Jaipur Harshit Naveen, Student at The ICFAI Law School, The ICFAI University, Jaipur Download Manuscript ABSTRACT The entire approach followed for appointing and transferring of judges in the Supreme and High Court has been questioned for its transparency and answerability. It is crucial for a fair trial that the judges must be independent, competent, and impartial. Thus, the adopted process for the appointment of judges shall be free from all types of direct or indirect influences from either the judiciary or government. The Indian Constitution of 1860 empowers the president for the appointment of judges after consulting with the Chief Justice of India. This study is based on doctrinal research to examine the effectiveness of the adopted appointment process i.e., collegium system, and to analyze the merits and demerits of the said process. This study is done in three steps viz. collecting data from different sources such as SCC Online, and Manupatra, analyzing the data, and finally report writing. This study traces the history of the collegium system and the long hassle between the judiciary and executive. It is argued that the collegium system has originated and evolved through various landmark judgments, namely first, second, third, and fourth judge’s cases. Because of the pitfalls in the collegium system the executive, through the ninety-ninth amendment introduced the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act of 2014 to replace it. However, it was declared unconstitutional in the fourth judge’s case. It is argued that the collegium system separates the judiciary from the executive safeguarding its decency and autonomy intact which also prevents further politization and biased judgments, but it may be subjected to nepotism and favoritism and lacks transparency and accountability, proving that there is a strict need to reform it. Furthermore, this paper analyzes the application of RTI, considering the collegium system in India. This study concludes with suggestions that make the collegium system more transparent and accountable. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume I, Issue IV, Page 525-537. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Copyright © LIJDLR 2024

UNDERSTANDING THE INDIAN COLLEGIUM SYSTEM: A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW Read More »

THE COLLEGIUM VS NJAC DEBATE: ANALYZING INDIA’S JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT SYSTEMS

Volume I Issue III /

THE COLLEGIUM VS NJAC DEBATE: ANALYZING INDIA’S JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT SYSTEMS Tanya Gupta, Author is a 3rd year Law student of BBA LL.B. at Amity University, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Download Manuscript ABSTRACT The Judiciary must be encouraged to find ways and means to regulate its own affairs – consistent with the spirit of the Constitution. – Former Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh. The conflict over judicial appointments in India is a longstanding issue. The original constitutional provision stated that the President appoints judges in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and other judges. However, this system evolved into the collegium system, criticized for its lack of transparency and perceived nepotism. The National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014, aimed to replace the collegium with a more transparent system but was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court a year after implementation. This article will analyze the historical evolution of judicial appointments in India, highlighting the issues that have emerged. It will then compare the Indian and American judicial appointment systems. Finally, the article will provide suggestions to enhance the judicial appointment process. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume I, Issue III, Page 185- 194. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Copyright © LIJDLR 2023 Recent content THE COLLEGIUM VS NJAC DEBATE: ANALYZING INDIA’S JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT SYSTEMS ROLE OF INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR IN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Water Rights And Climate Change: An Analysis Of Transboundary Water Conflicts Amidst Environmental Challenges In The Indus Region With Specific Reference To The Indus Waters Treaty Of 1960 Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism In India: Limitations And Recommendations Parallel Paths: Analysing The Overlapping Jurisdiction Of Cci And Sectoral Regulators In India CONTEMPORARY CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES IN INDIA : AN ANALYSIS OF KEY ISSUES

THE COLLEGIUM VS NJAC DEBATE: ANALYZING INDIA’S JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT SYSTEMS Read More »