Supreme Court Collegium ‘transparently’ aired out Central government’s objections to recommendation of five Judges. Collegium gave legal clarifications to the objections.
In what could be a first, in its statements published on the Supreme Court website, the Collegium revealed in detail why the Central government objected to the candidature of various persons recommended by the judges’ body for elevation to High Courts.
The statements reiterating the proposals to elevate the following three lawyers are :
1.Saurabh Kirpal – Delhi High Court
Government’s reason for rejection: He is openly gay, could be biased; his partner is a Swiss national.
Collegium’s response: Constitution recognises right to sexual orientation; Mr.Kirpal will add diversity to the Delhi High Court. Having a foreign national as a partner is not a disqualification.
2.Somasekhar Sundaresan – Bombay High Court
Government’s stand: Sundaresan aired his views on social media about pending cases.
Collegium’s response: Expression of views by a candidate is not a disqualification.
3. R John Sathyan – Madras High Court
Government: Sathyan shared an article critical of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and another one on the suicide of a medical aspirant.
Collegium: Sharing an article does not impinge on suitability, character or integrity of candidate.
In another resolution reiterating for the second time its recommendation to elevate
Advocates 4.Amitesh Banerjee and 5.Sakya Sen
as judges of the Calcutta High Court, the Collegium expressed its anguish with the Union Law Ministry’s Department of Justice (DoJ) for not approving the names of Banerjee and Sen since July 2019.
What stands out in these resolutions is how the Collegium has addressed the chief criticism that has been consistently levelled against it -transparency, or rather the lack thereof.
The Collegium has often been criticised for its closed-door functioning, opacity and give-and-take compromises with the executive.
Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju has been relentless in his attacks against the Collegium, calling it out for having no Constitutional basis and seeking a greater say for the government in appointing judges to the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
Most recently, he had written to Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud suggesting that government representatives be included in the Supreme Court and High Court Collegiums.
Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar, himself a Senior Advocate has also been critical of the Collegium.
Interestingly, this has also coincided with an attack on social media against CJI Chandrachud, who also heads the Collegium.
With Collegium’s transparency, on both objections and answers, we come to know about the mindset of Law Minister which is based mainly on gender, partner’s nationality, just a post sharing against Modi.