Collegium System vs NJAC in India
⚖️ Collegium System vs. NJAC in India
The debate between the Collegium System and the NJAC revolves around who should have the ultimate authority in the appointment and transfer of judges to the higher judiciary in India.
📌 1. Collegium System: Explained
🏛️ What is the Collegium System?
The Collegium System is a judge-led mechanism for the appointment and transfer of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts. It evolved through judicial interpretation, not legislation or the Constitution.
👥 Composition
For Supreme Court appointments:
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) + 4 senior-most Supreme Court judges.
For High Court appointments:
The CJI, 2 senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, and the concerned High Court Chief Justice.
📜 Origin Through Case Law: The Three Judges Cases
1st Judges Case (S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981)
Held that the executive had primacy in judicial appointments.
Consultation with the judiciary was not binding.
2nd Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993)
Overruled the 1st Judges Case.
Introduced the Collegium System, giving primacy to the judiciary in appointments.
3rd Judges Case (Re Presidential Reference, 1998)
Clarified that the Collegium would consist of the CJI and 4 senior-most SC judges.
Decisions must be based on collective consensus, not individual discretion.
✅ Merits of Collegium System
Preserves judicial independence.
Insulates the judiciary from political influence.
❌ Criticism
Opaque and non-transparent.
No formal mechanism for accountability.
No representation from civil society or the executive.
Alleged favoritism and nepotism.
📌 2. NJAC (National Judicial Appointments Commission): Explained
⚖️ What is NJAC?
The NJAC was a constitutional body proposed to replace the Collegium System with a more transparent and accountable mechanism involving both the executive and judiciary.
🧾 Constitutional Amendment
Introduced by the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014.
NJAC was to be governed by the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014.
👥 Proposed Composition of NJAC
Chief Justice of India (CJI) – Chairperson
Two senior-most Supreme Court judges
Union Law Minister
Two eminent persons, to be nominated by a committee (PM, CJI, and Leader of Opposition)
✅ Merits of NJAC
Aimed to bring transparency and accountability.
Included representation from executive and civil society.
Tried to democratize the appointment process.
❌ Criticism
Undermined judicial independence.
Inclusion of Law Minister raised concerns about political interference.
"Eminent persons" clause was considered vague.
⚖️ Key Case: Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015)
🔎 Also known as: NJAC Judgment
A 5-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment and the NJAC Act as unconstitutional by a 4:1 majority.
⚖️ Court’s Key Observations
Judicial independence is a basic feature of the Constitution.
Allowing the executive or any non-judicial authority a role in appointments violates the basic structure doctrine.
NJAC gave veto power to non-judicial members, which could compromise judicial independence.
🧑⚖️ Dissenting Opinion (Justice J. Chelameswar)
Argued that the Collegium System lacks transparency and should be reformed.
Supported NJAC as a step toward accountability.
🆚 Comparison: Collegium System vs NJAC
| Feature | Collegium System | NJAC |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Evolved through judgments | Constitutional Amendment |
| Composition | Only senior judges | Judges + Law Minister + Eminent persons |
| Transparency | Opaque, no public disclosure | Intended to be more transparent |
| Accountability | Criticized for lack | Included executive & civil oversight |
| Judicial Independence | Strongly protected | Viewed as compromised |
| Status | In force | Struck down in 2015 |
🎯 Present Status
The Collegium System is still in force.
The NJAC has been struck down and does not exist.
However, the Collegium System remains under criticism, and there have been calls for reform.
📚 Conclusion
The Collegium System prioritizes judicial independence but suffers from opacity and lack of accountability. The NJAC, though well-intentioned, was struck down because it allowed executive influence, potentially violating the basic structure of the Constitution.
RELATED Blog
0 comments