Tamil Nadu’s Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party has submitted its recommendations on how to improve the Collegium system to the Ministry of Law and Justice..Earlier this month, the Supreme Court had elicited responses from civil society as to how the criticized system of appointments to the higher judiciary can be bettered..Practising advocate and Organisation Secretary of the party, RS Bharathi was responsible for drafting the proposal..Before looking at the recommendations, it is interesting to note that the proposal poses questions about how suitability for appointment can be gauged and how transparency can be secured..The letter states,.“…an advocate may be practising in a High court in a branch of law and he will be specialised in that branch. However, the Collegium judges will have no chance of assessing this lawyer, in case if he has not appeared before them…How can these lawyers be assessed by the Collegium judges?.It is a matter of record that there exist no guidelines for the working of the Collegium system nor is there any abstract, set standard by which the Collegium of judges selects candidates for appointment to the Higher Judiciary except seeking for a ‘25 point questionnaire’ after short listing the names in so far as the High Courts are concerned.”.However, the proposal has suggested little in the way of improving these facets. Regardless, it does suggest some changes in the working of the Collegium as listed below..A Diverse Judiciary.The party has called for a judiciary that is representative of all sections of society. This is in pursuance of a 2014 Supreme Court judgment on appointments to the higher judiciary. It is also suggested that women lawyers be considered for elevation equally. The proposal states,.“…while selecting candidates for appointment to higher judiciary, the Collegium affords equal importance to all sections of society and ensures that there is social justice and equality of opportunity to all lawyers irrespective of caste, creed, religion and language..Further, there are number of women lawyers practising in all branches of law and they should also be considered proportionately.”.State Government’s Opinion.Rather unsurprisingly, the party has suggested that the concerned state government be consulted before recommending names for elevation to the high courts..“The State Governments are the closest to the people and are in the best position to voice the concerns of the people and also to gauge the suitability of lawyers through various inputs at all levels….…this collective consultative process will serve as an inbuilt mechanism to know effectively the back ground of the candidates to be recommended besides against any arbitrariness or personal bias in selection and appointment of Judges.”.Complaints against Judges.The proposal states that the current system does not enable lawyers or the general public to voice their grievances against sitting Judges..“…when there are genuine grievances against sitting Judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court, especially grievances such as corruption or impropriety, the complaints must be received by an appropriate body and must be investigated fairly.”.To this end, the DMK has suggested that the Collegium itself deal with complaints of this nature..“The party would suggest that the very same Collegium that appoints Judges can receive these complaints through the collegiums-secretariat and can cause an inquiry to be conducted if they feel there is some merit in the complaint. The Collegium must also be empowered to take suitable action in case the complaint against the Judge is found to be true.”
Tamil Nadu’s Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party has submitted its recommendations on how to improve the Collegium system to the Ministry of Law and Justice..Earlier this month, the Supreme Court had elicited responses from civil society as to how the criticized system of appointments to the higher judiciary can be bettered..Practising advocate and Organisation Secretary of the party, RS Bharathi was responsible for drafting the proposal..Before looking at the recommendations, it is interesting to note that the proposal poses questions about how suitability for appointment can be gauged and how transparency can be secured..The letter states,.“…an advocate may be practising in a High court in a branch of law and he will be specialised in that branch. However, the Collegium judges will have no chance of assessing this lawyer, in case if he has not appeared before them…How can these lawyers be assessed by the Collegium judges?.It is a matter of record that there exist no guidelines for the working of the Collegium system nor is there any abstract, set standard by which the Collegium of judges selects candidates for appointment to the Higher Judiciary except seeking for a ‘25 point questionnaire’ after short listing the names in so far as the High Courts are concerned.”.However, the proposal has suggested little in the way of improving these facets. Regardless, it does suggest some changes in the working of the Collegium as listed below..A Diverse Judiciary.The party has called for a judiciary that is representative of all sections of society. This is in pursuance of a 2014 Supreme Court judgment on appointments to the higher judiciary. It is also suggested that women lawyers be considered for elevation equally. The proposal states,.“…while selecting candidates for appointment to higher judiciary, the Collegium affords equal importance to all sections of society and ensures that there is social justice and equality of opportunity to all lawyers irrespective of caste, creed, religion and language..Further, there are number of women lawyers practising in all branches of law and they should also be considered proportionately.”.State Government’s Opinion.Rather unsurprisingly, the party has suggested that the concerned state government be consulted before recommending names for elevation to the high courts..“The State Governments are the closest to the people and are in the best position to voice the concerns of the people and also to gauge the suitability of lawyers through various inputs at all levels….…this collective consultative process will serve as an inbuilt mechanism to know effectively the back ground of the candidates to be recommended besides against any arbitrariness or personal bias in selection and appointment of Judges.”.Complaints against Judges.The proposal states that the current system does not enable lawyers or the general public to voice their grievances against sitting Judges..“…when there are genuine grievances against sitting Judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court, especially grievances such as corruption or impropriety, the complaints must be received by an appropriate body and must be investigated fairly.”.To this end, the DMK has suggested that the Collegium itself deal with complaints of this nature..“The party would suggest that the very same Collegium that appoints Judges can receive these complaints through the collegiums-secretariat and can cause an inquiry to be conducted if they feel there is some merit in the complaint. The Collegium must also be empowered to take suitable action in case the complaint against the Judge is found to be true.”