Here is the text of the letter sent yesterday by 45 members of society committed to public work - from Chennai and around India to the Supreme Court Collegium and the President, asking that some criteria be laid down for appointment of judges. Reducing the scope for arbitrariness and personal discretion - by specifying some criteria will only strengthen the institution of the judiciary, whosoever the appointing authority may be - whether it be the collegium or whether it be a Judicial Appointments Commission. This is in the context of a major current event in the judiciary - the filling up of 15 vacancies is happening now in the Madras High Court. This is a large number - and these appointments will impact the country for the next 2 decades - as these people go on to become Chief Justices in other courts and go on to the Supreme Court also, and most importantly, become part of a process that appoints the new judges also! All that the people are asking is a) let there be some criteria - instead of naked nepotism; and b) let there be tools to identify suitability - let only the best and brightest adorn the judiciary. Judgeship is not favours to be granted or posts to be bargained for on caste lines - it is a very serious nation-building exercise. Lets do this job more earnestly than we do today. MEMORANDUM Forum for Integrity in Governance (A Civil Society Coalition) A-5, Second Main Road, Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Tiruvanmiyur, Chennai – 600041. Tel: 044-24515601 23.07.2013 To The President Union of India Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi To The Chief Justice and Members of the Judicial Collegium, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi To The Chief Justice and Members of the Judicial Collegium High Court of Madras Chennai To Mr. Kapil Sibal, Union Minister for Law, Government of India, New Delhi. Sirs, Subject: Appointments to higher judiciary – Civil Society representation thereof We write to you to express our concerns about two disturbing deficiencies in the process of appointment of judges to the higher judiciary – (1) lack of transparency and (2) no serious qualifying criteria for the selection process to such a high constitutional post - and to suggest certain solutions. You will appreciate that civil society has high stake in and is greatly interested in the independence and health of the judicial system. We wish to see men and women of caliber and integrity take charge of these high offices. So while the nation at large debates WHO should be the appointing authority, (i.e whether the collegium or a Judicial Commission), we wish to highlight that a more fundamental reform/rethinking is needed regarding HOW the selection takes place. Currently there is raging controversy on the list of names which have been finalised and forwarded by the Madras High Court to the Supreme Court for consideration for appointment as High Court Judges. We understand that allegations abound about candidates being chosen based on criteria far removed from demonstrated or proven caliber, knowledge, expertise and integrity. Instead they are being chosen based on divisive considerations and intense, unhealthy lobbying. Fall out is that undeserving persons of questionable competence, experience and integrity get appointed and contribute to judicial delays, aberrations and poor quality judgments. More importantly, good candidates who would make worthy judges are kept out of the appointments process due to lack of transparency in the selection procedure. The end loser is the legal system, administration of justice and Rule of Law. Regarding the list being considered for the Madras High Court, we understand that Intelligence Bureau has adversely reported on some names, while some, who have consented to be judges have withdrawn. This could give an opportunity for a relook at the list. We therefore urge you to revisit the same and ensure that an open, transparent, fair and participatory process is followed in filling up the present 15 vacancies to the Madras High Court. We also urge you to openly lay down the criteria for selection. We hope to see candidates who can demonstrate (a) a high level of expertise in their chosen areas of practice, (b) ability to quickly absorb and analyse information, (c) appropriate knowledge of the law and its underlying principles or the ability to acquire this knowledge where necessary. We also hope the chosen candidates will have (a) integrity and independence of mind, (b) sound judgement, (c) decisiveness, (d) objectivity, (e) ability and willingness to learn and develop professionally and (f) ability to work constructively with others, (g) ability to treat everyone with respect and sensitivity whatever their background and (h) willingness to listen with patience and courtesy, (i) ability to inspire respect and confidence (j) ability to maintain authority when challenged, (k) ability to work with speed and under pressure, and (l) the ability to organize time effectively and produce clear, reasoned judgements expeditiously. It is necessary that the process of short-listing be made public so that members of the public and members of the Bar may participate in the process and provide information about the candidates and her/his abilities; this will ensure that ultimately only the best and the brightest are selected. The task of appointing the right persons to man our higher judiciary is not one to be compromised in any way. It has to be done with utmost diligence and care for it is the job of the judges to continuously interpret our Constitution and the actions of the governments and public agencies in the light of the constitutional spirit. The 121st law Commission Report of 1987 had recommended the substitution of arbitrary, individual preferences with defined objective criteria. These 15 vacancies, if filled up now with the wrong persons, will cause damage to the legal system and administration of justice for several years. We therefore request you to kindly withdraw the controversial list and go through a fresh transparent and participatory process to ensure that Madras High Court gets men and women of competence and integrity as its judges. Yours Truly, M.G.Devasahayam IAS (Retd) (Convener, Forum for Integrity in Governance, Writer, Author) This Memorandum has been endorsed by: 1. SP Ambrose IAS (Retd), Former Principal Secretary (Home) 2. BS Raghavan IAS (Retd) (Former Advisor to UN, Writer, Columnist) 3. YP Anand, Former Chairman, Railway Board 4. Raj Srinivasan IAS (Retd), Former Secretary to Government of India 5. Ms. Vasanthi Devi, former Vice Chancellor, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University 6. MR Sivaraman IAS (Retd) Former Secretary to Government of India 7. EAS Sarma IAS (Retd) Former Secretary to Government of India 8. Prashant Bhushan, Advocate, Supreme Court of India 9. Shailesh Gandhi, former Central Information Commissioner 10. PC Cyriac IAS (Retd), Former Principal Secretary 11. Sushil Tripathi IAS (Retd), Former Secretary to Government of India 12. Kamal Jaswal IAS (Retd), Former Secretary to Government of India 13. Prof. Jagdeep Chhokar, former Professor and Dean, IIM, Ahmedabad 14. S. Kalyanaraman, former ED, Asian Development Bank 15. Prof. T. Swaminathan (Retd), IIT, Madras 16. M. Raman IAS (Retd), Former Secretary to Government of India 17. R. Santhanam IAS (Retd), Former Member, Central Administrative Tribunal 18. Arvind P.Datar, Senior Counsel, Supreme Court and High Court, Madras 19. Prof V.S.Elizabeth, National Law School of India University, Bangalore 20. Prof. T. Devidas, National Law School of India University, Bangalore 21. R. Sivasailam IAS (Retd), Former Principal Secretary 22. K. Ashok Vardhan Shetty IAS (Retd), Principal Secretary 23. Prof. K. Shanmugavelayuthan, Convener, TN Forces 24. Bhagvanji Raiyani, Chairman, Forum For Fast Justice, Mumbai 25. Pranav Sachdeva, Advocate, Supreme Court of India 26. V. Suresh, Advocate, Madras High Court 27. Col. Karan Kharb, Writer, Columnist 28. Ms. Elizabeth Seshadri (Advocate and Convenor, Forum for Independence, Accountability and Transparency in the Legal System) 29. Senthil Arumugam, General Secretary, Satta Panchayat Iyakkam 30. Nityanand Jayaraman, Writer, Environmentalist 31. Kunal Verma, Historian, Author 32. Bhawani Shanker Kusum, Convener, Sampoorn Kranti Rashtriya Manch 33. Karthik Seshadri, Advocate, Madras High Court 34. V. Raghavachari, Advocate, Madras High Court 35. Vikram Raghavan, Contributor, Law and Other Things 36. Dr. Gabriele Dietrich, Prof. Emeritus, Center for Social Analysis, President, Pennurimai Iyakkam. 37. Anand R. Doss, Former Director, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority 38. A.Subramani, Welfare Party of India 39. Kanan Dhru, Founder, Research Foundation for Governance in India 40. Mr. NGR Prasad, Senior Advocate, Madras High Court. 41. Prof. Pradip Prabhu, Advocate, National Convenor, Campaign for Survival and Dignity, Mumbai 42. Mr. Biraj Patnaik, Principal Adviser, Office of the Supreme Court Commissioners on Food Security, Delhi 43. Mr. Brian Lobo, Kashtakari Sanghatana, Maharashtra 44. Harish Narasappa, Co-Founder, DAKSH Society 45. D.Jagadheeshwaran, President, Lok Satta Party
Posted on: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 14:37:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015