National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014

The Supreme Court of India (SCI) in October 2015 struck down both 99th constitutional amendment act and National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014. The reason stated by SCI was that it undermines the independence of Judiciary and involvement of executive would compromise the integrity of SCI.

What is a Collegium System?

  • A collegium system for appointment of judges is a body headed by chief justice of India and consisting of 4 other senior-most judges (SCI) which recommends judges to be appointed in SC/HC to the President.
  • NJAC Act, 2014 proposed to change the appointments of judges from collegium led to commission led. The commission thus setup consisted of 6 members – Chief Justice of India as Chairperson, two other senior-most judges of SCI, the Law Minister and two eminent members nominated by the Prime Minister, the CJI and the Leader of Opposition of the Lok Sabha.
  • This commission would then recommend the names for presidential assent, who on assent would be appointed as a judge of Supreme Court or High Court.
  • There was a review petition of 2015 judgment which the SCI dismissed in 2018.
  • A supervisory or an organization ensuring proper checks is must. If not NJAC, any other body with inclusion of executive must be created to ensure proper checks.

Pros and Cons of Striking down NJAC

Pros of Striking down NJAC

Cons of Striking down NJAC

Independence of Judiciary is must to ensure proper check on the excesses of Executive and Legislature.

Constitution makers never imagined an organ of state fully independent. The present structure makes judiciary completely independent of its subparts as the appointment is in Judiciary hands and the procedure of removal is extremely complicated.

The interpreter of the constitution (SCI) is the last hope of common citizen of the country and any executive encroachment into Judiciary must be prevented.

Instances of favoritism, cases of corruption have erupted in the past which makes it clear that judiciary is not free of flaws and hence a supervisory body needed.

Related Content