Should there be NJAC? [poll]

+1 vote
asked Dec 14, 2016 in Polls by PRASHANT TYAGI (1,175 points)
Cant Say

1 Answer

+2 votes
answered Dec 14, 2016 by Pra Na (1,750 points)
reshown Dec 14, 2016 by challenger
There should be NJAC as even the judiciary needs to be transparent and accountable to someone. The doctrine of checks and balances should be applied to judiciary as well.

The judiciary can't expect the other organs of the government to be transparent and be itself opaque. For eg. the judiciary isn't completely compliant of the RTI act as well.

For the credibility of the judges to stay intact, it has to begin with a transparent selection of the judges for the highest positions.

There are concers of  nepotism and corruption within judiciary and hence it is imperative to restore its reputation. Otherwise the cases determined by the highest curts would carry no cridibility among the people.

Justice should not be just served by has to be seen to be served.

Yes there are concerns of the executive controlling the judicial appointments and the courts are vary as it has experienced the period of EMERGENCY in India. Suitable mechanisms need to be figured out to quell the concers and a common ground needs to be agreed upon to put an end to the speculations about the apointment procedures.
commented Dec 14, 2016 by PRASHANT TYAGI (1,175 points)
But I think that there should be no involvement of executive in judiciary given the nature of Doctrine of separation of power. Instead of NJAC, there should be amendment in the procedure of appointment and removal of judges in higher judiciary in order to make it more transparent and accountable.
But by involving politics in it is like killing the institution of judiciary which is considered as the most pious pillar of constitution.
commented Dec 14, 2016 by Pra Na (1,750 points)
even in the procedure of appointment, the executive is involved. It's only a question of to what extent it is involved and to what extent it can influence the appointments politically
commented Dec 14, 2016 by PRASHANT TYAGI (1,175 points)
As far as I know appointment is totally the domain of Judiciary. It only recommends the names to the government after taking decision to appoint or transfer.
In the body which appoint or transfer there in only Judicial person as of now and NJAC will make executive involvement in that body like law minister and PM. That involvement is the point of concern.
commented Dec 14, 2016 by Pra Na (1,750 points)
reshown Dec 14, 2016 by challenger
I could be wrong wrt procedure of appointment ... I don't knw the details
commented Dec 15, 2016 by PRASHANT TYAGI (1,175 points)
The present procedure of appointment is based on the Collegium Sysmtem which is consist of the CJI and four senior most Judges of SC. This system has its genesis in a series of judgments called "JUDGES CASE". Judgement in Third Judge case has come to be the present form of the collegium.
The government has a role only after names have been decided by the collegium. Government can raise objection and seek clarification regarding the collegium's choices, but if the collegium riterates the same names, the government is bound to appoint them as judges.
WhatsApp Share Share

Tip: To navigate between questions within same category, use "← Prev Question" & "Next Question →"
FB & Google users, use your email id to login. Reset Password If problem persists
Help : Reset password - step-by-step

Announcements :
Win books - Announcing ‘Study with Self Respect (SSR)’ program

Recommended Books for Prelims

3,130 questions

4,666 answers


9,835 users