So much is being discussed about the NJAC Judgment that I thought something extremely precious is lying between those pages. But, the judgment turned out to be a damp squib. The government couldn’t even satisfy the court of the need for the review of the earlier judgments on the same issue. I wonder what is Mr. Jaitely achieving by making so much of loud noise now; the bomb has already failed to explode. During my law course, I also thought that the plain reading of the Constitution leaves no doubt that the primacy of decision making with respect to appointment of Judges and all ancillary issues thereof lies with the Executive; but, of course, at that time I had no idea how innovative the Judiciary can be when it wants to be. There can be no doubt that the primacy of decision making should lie with and in fact lies with the Judiciary. Only important issue raised in the arguments was appropriation of Executive’s powers by the Judiciary, which is against the norm of Separation of Power (para 205). The SC countered it with giving many examples from the constitution itself of dilution of this norm and safeguards thereof (para 266 onwards). But, of course, the legal fraternity is not satisfied, but they don’t want to give this power to the Executive either. I think too much time has been wasted on this relatively minor issue. The bigger issue is ensuring the integrity of the Judiciary, and the first step towards that is ensuring the digital recording of the proceedings of the courts; however, I don’t think senior advocates at large will let this happen: they gain a lot from the obfuscation in the records of the proceedings.
About the Author
Ankur Mutreja is an advocate-cum-writer, and his blogs are amongst his modes of expression. He has also authored six books: "Kerala Hugged"; "Light: Philosophy"; "Flare: Opinions"; "Sparks: Satire and Reviews"; "Writings @ Ankur Mutreja"; and "Nine Poems"; which can be downloaded free from the links on the top menu.