More women judges, RTI applicability, 10% Judges from Bar – Read the experts’ solutions for improving the #collegium

On October 16 of this year, the Supreme Court passed a historic decision, holding that the National Judicial Appointments Commission was in violation of the Constitution of India. Predictably, the 1,036-page judgment raised quite a storm, including some of the most public critiques a Supreme Court judgment has ever seen..Yet within this judgment, lay another, equally significant decision – to invite public opinion on improving the collegium system. To this end, the Court elicited suggestions based on four criteria – transparency, eligibility, secretariat and complaints..Until November 4, over 60 suggestions have been compiled by Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand and Senior Advocate Arvind Datar. Among the contributors are stalwarts from the Bar and Bench alike including Fali Nariman, Ram Jethmalani, KK Venugopal, former Chief Justices of India MN Venkatachaliah and the late JS Verma JJ. (submitted in 2010) and even a sitting apex court judge – Justice FMI Kailfulla..And this is what has been provided so far..Transparency.While some suggestions demand complete transparency in the working of the collegium, others such as Fali Nariman, believe that too much transparency can do more harm than good. He believes that if the candidates’ information is made public, it may not be used for “appropriate purposes”..Senior Advocate Sunil Gupta concurs with Nariman, calling for a balance between confidentiality and transparency. He has suggested that transparency should be maximum at the stage of application, but the consultative process of the collegium must remain confidential..On the topic of the collegium’s deliberations, some suggest that the minutes of all meetings should be recorded and made available online, with some even saying that the minutes should come under the purview of the RTI Act. As reported earlier, the Centre has suggested that the minutes be recorded in the National Archives..To ensure that high court collegiums consider their best judges for elevation, one suggestion made is to conduct interview with candidates so that collegium judges can get to know candidates from different benches. Further, in order to ensure full transparency, the rejected candidate should be given reasons as to why his elevation was objected..The other suggestions include disclosure of relatives who are judges, an annual report on judicial appointments, and informal meetings between the collegium and the concerned Chief Minister to avoid any delay in appointments..Eligibility.Most of the suggestions under this head call for objective, well-defined eligibility criteria. In order to achieve this, it has been suggested that something on the lines of Australia’s point grade system for judges be used in India. A written examination and interview has also been suggested..Another opinion is that candidates who make an “expression of interest” to become a judge also be considered. This may resemble the Senior Advocate application system prevalent in many high courts..As far as Supreme Court elevations are concerned, it has been suggested that not only the Chief Justice of a high court, but also other meritorious judges and even members of tribunals be considered for elevation..For district judges on the threshold of being elevated, it is suggested that the minimum experience requirement be reduced to 12 months from 18. This suggestion was made as a solution to the alarming number of vacancies..Other suggestions include reservations for minorities, special consideration for those who have donepro bono work, and a 10% quota for Supreme Court judges from the Bar..Secretariat.The suggestions call for a Secretariat to assist the collegium in collecting information on quality and quantity of judgments delivered by candidates, number of landmark cases and even information on the number of publications to assess ‘academic credibility’ of the potential judges..Others have suggested that the members of the Secretariat should have the same independence and status as the members of the Supreme Court Registry and should be free from Executive interference. One suggestion is that the permanent Secretariat should be headed by a past director of the National Judicial Academy or a Vice-Chancellor of a law university and that no practicing lawyers should be part of it..A joint submission by former Supreme Court judges Venkatachaliah & Verma JJ. in 2010 calls for a Search Committee to assist the Secretariat..Complaints.The lawyers and judges have emphasized that a system of complaints against judges is of paramount importance. However, such complaints should be treated with caution. It has been suggested that only complaints with material evidence are to be entertained, and that the judge in question should be given a chance to respond to the allegations..It has also been proposed that complaints be looked into by a panel of retired judges. Venkatachaliah and Verma JJ. had called for the constitution of a National Oversight Committee to deal with such complaints..Another interesting suggestion is that the names of the judges should be disclosed to the public 30 days before consideration by the collegium. During this period, the public can write to Secretariat about grievances against members..Miscellaneous.The Union of India has made the following suggestions on judge transfers:.Transfers should be made by the Supreme Court collegium after consulting Chief Justices of the transferee and transferor high courts.If a complaint is received against a judge, disciplinary proceedings should be initiated; in no case should a complaint become the reason to transfer a HC judge.Every transfer order should contain reasons to be made public..Another notable suggestion is to increase the number of women judges in the higher judiciary. As of now, the Supreme Court has 1 woman judge (Justice Banumathi) and all High Courts combined have a mere 63 woman judges. To put that in perspective, only 10.3% of sitting High Court judges are women.