Collegium reiterates objections to draft memo

The Supreme Court collegium has reiterated its rejection of several crucial clauses in the government’s draft Memorandum of Procedure for appointment of judges. The collegium is standing firm by its objections despite government’s insistence to smoothen ruffled feathers over judicial appointments. The collegium has said both merit and seniority should be balanced.

Background:

Raising concerns over two issues in the draft Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointment of judges including the one relating to government’s right to reject a recommendation on concerns of national interest, the Supreme Court had sent back the draft on judges’ appointment in May 2016.

Proposed contentious rules:

• Government’s right to reject a recommendation on concerns of national interest.
• Involvement of the AG in suggesting a list of suitable candidates.
• Names for judges’ appointments could be suggested by all judges of the bench as well as by the AG and the bar.
• The list of candidates brought before the collegium will first be vetted by a committee of two retired judges and an eminent person.

Present scenario:

Presently, the government is bound to comply if the Supreme Court collegium chooses to override its disapproval of a person recommended for judicial appointment. If the government returns the candidate’s file to the collegium, and the latter reiterates its recommendation, the government has no choice but to comply.