Justices Jasti Chelameswar, Kurian Joseph recount what triggered the historic judges' press conference 5 years ago

Over five years after the historic press conference by four Supreme Court judges, two of the retired judges who were part of the same recounted the circumstances that led to it..Justice Kurian Joseph said that a story that began with great expectations eventually ended up being the opposite. Justice Jasti Chelameshwar made it clear that there was no purpose to be achieved by the press conference, but it was rather intended to flag certain irregularities."There was need for some course correction and we thought people of this country should know and ultimately people should decide what to do. As a free citizen I am entitled to place views on record, everyone joined voluntarily. No one was brought forcefully though a picture was sought to be painted since it was my residence", Justice Chelameswar said.Justice Joseph said it was his belief the press conference will send a signal. "There is something called master of roster and he (Chief Justice of India) decides which case goes before which bench. We both had been Chief Justices of High Courts. I believed the press conference will send a signal. In six years of Supreme Court there were three full courts held.. but in high courts such full courts are held once in six months. Otherwise there is arbitrariness. After the press conference, there were in house meetings of several incoming Chief Justices including the present Chief Justice DY Chandrachud so that such a situation can be avoided. We thought it (press conference) will help in streamlining the distribution of work. There have been judges who never headed a constitution bench and there were judges who headed such benches one after another. This was the triggering point for me for that press conference. There was no consultation at all. I did not see any signs of change thereafter. I hope and pray that the present CJI who had mooted some ideas will remember them and take the institution ahead in the interest of administration of justice," said Justice Joseph. The retired judges were speaking on judicial overreach at the India Today Conclave (South)..On his famous dissent in the National Judicial Appointments Commission case, Justice Chelameswar said he believed he was correct in upholding the same.I feel I did not do anything incorrect by writing the dissenting judgment. Only Ram Jethmalani voted against it, and it was passed unanimously (in the parliament). He underscored that an elected government should have a say in appointment of judges in a democratic country."I found it difficult to believe that elected government would have no say in appointment of judges in a democratic country. To tell them you will have no role in appointment, I could not agree. I believe the dissent was a correct legal principle," Justice Chelameswar said. On declining to be part of the Collegium, he said its decisions were opaque. "See some recommendations are made, not acted upon and the collegium then withdraws it. What does this indicate it; something fundamentally wrong with the logic. If process is transparent then accountability will increase."Justice Chelameswar also highlighted the issue of having a polyvocal court with each bench having conflicting views on same issue."In the last 75 years in the institution of Supreme Court, a great paradox has come into existence. The highest court of the country should sit as one body while laying down the law. But we have 16 to 17 division benches and then what happens is that there are conflicting views. Then reference to larger bench of 9 judges and some matters pending since 20 years for 9 judges hearing," he said.He called for full-court meetings for exercise of administrative powers like transfer of judges. Giving an example, he said,"When all the turmoil was going on, there was complaints about one High Court judge and it appears the then Chief Justice of India [CJI] ordered an in-house inquiry against the particular judge. None of us were aware, and I was J1 senior most; and would you accept such a situation where the Chief Minister or Prime Minister takes a decision completely alone. Are we ready to live in a country like this?" He described concentration of power with the Chief Justice of India as antithetical to time-tested constitutional systems preventing the same. "This is the basis of paradox and what ought to be done by full court is done by one individual and one individual thing is done by full courts.".Read what Justice Kurian Joseph said about same-sex marriage here.