“The way in which judges are appointed embody a set of values about democracy. Choosing judge based on undisclosed criterion in largely unknown circumstances reflects an increasing democratic deficit,” Shah said in his speech at the fifth annual convention of the Central Information Commission.
“The present system of judicial appointments in the constitutional courts exemplifies the misalignment between the core values of judicial independence and accountability,” said Justice Shah, who had upheld a judgment in favour of the disclosure of personal assets by Supreme Court judges under the RTI.
Justice Shah proved to be a critic of the Judges (Enquiry) Bill, 2006 which allows people to file complaints against sitting judges which can then be examined by proposed National Judicial Council. The council can make reference to Parliament for removal or impose punishment on judges.
“This presents an example of the cure being worse than the disease. This is clearly impermissible for it is unconstitutional and severely undermines the status and functioning of the judiciary. What cannot be done by not less than 100 members of Parliament can now be initiated by only one person,” he said.
Justice Shah said until an alternative constitutional procedure is devised for removal of “errant judges without compromising independence, the procedure for complaints must, at the first instance, be an in-house exercise and cannot be given to a small and select number of persons”.
New Delhi : Former Delhi High Court chief justice A P Shah on Tuesday hit out at the Supreme Court collegium system of judicial appointments, saying choosing a judge to the highest constitutional courts in country under unknown circumstances and on opaque criteria reflect an increasing “democratic deficit”. The judge, who wrote the judgment decriminalising adult, consensual gay sex, said, “Our current appointments system is out of step with democratic culture primarily because it lacks transparency, and provides for no oversight.”
.JPG)
.JPG)
