Posted: 16 Oct 2015 11:27 AM PDT
The Supreme Court verdict on
the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, today evoked
mixed reactions from legal experts with some former apex court judges
hailing it for upholding independence of judiciary while some veterans
termed the collegium system a failure.
Welcoming the judgement, former
Chief Justice of IndiaJustice Altamas Kabir and ex-Supreme Court Judge
Justice A K Ganguly expressed pride in the Indian judicial system,
saying the decision restored independence of judiciary, a view not
shared by former Delhi High Court judge Justice R S Sodhi, who said the
verdict shows lack of trust on Parliament’s maturity.
Giving thumbs up to the
verdict, Justice Kabir said, “I have always been against NJAC and I find
it unconstitutional as it seeks to give the biggest litigants in this
country a hand in the appointments of the judges who will judge them.
Independence of judiciary is imperative if democracy is to survive.”
Echoing the opinion of the
former judges, ex-Law Minister H R Bhardwaj said, “I am happy today. For
the last one year there have been no judicial appointments, people have
been crying for justice. This one limb of the state– Judiciary– is
above criticism. Democracy recognises the independence of judiciary
which is the heart and soul of the Constitution.”
“NJAC has been supported by both the houses. The bill was not passed by Centre but byParliament unanimously,” he said.
Criticising the collegium
system, former Attorney General Soli Sorabjee and senior advocate K T S
Tulsi said it was already acknowledged that it was a failed system and
that when the Parliament unanimously adopts a law, it cannot be called
interference in independence of judiciary.
“Does this Act really strike on
the independence of the judiciary, I don’t think so. There were a few
things which could have created some problems like appointment of
eminent persons and some other provisions but those could have been read
down,” Sorabjee said.
However, Bhardwaj strongly
opposed the NJAC saying it “entitled outsiders to participate in
appointments. Judges are always recommended by judiciary and Centre is
only consulted.”
Echoing his view, senior
advocate Indira Jaising and lawyer Prashant Bhushan hailed the decision
saying it upheld the fundamental constitutional provision which
maintained the separation between judiciary and executive and cautioned
that verdict be not polarised.
Bhushan, who had represented
one of the petitoners against the NJAC, said that judicial independence
is backbone of the Constitution and the Act could have influenced that.
( Source – PTI )