Challenges with the Current Collegium System vs. Proposed NJAC
Collegium System
The selection criteria for judges are unclear, which can lead to accusations of favoritism and nepotism.
The system is criticized for being opaque and unaccountable.
Prolonged delays in appointing judges contribute to case backlogs.
Proposed NJAC
Critics argue NJAC could give excessive control to the executive branch, compromising judicial independence.
The Supreme Court struck down NJAC as unconstitutional, fearing it might undermine impartiality in appointments.
National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014
The NJAC Act aimed to replace the collegium system with a commission including the Chief Justice of India, the Law Minister, two eminent persons, and two senior judges to oversee judicial appointments.
The NJAC was designed to include both judiciary and non-judiciary members to ensure a balanced and transparent appointment process.
This Act provides for the insertion of Articles 124A, 124B and 124C to the Constitution of India
The NJAC Act and the 99th Constitution Amendment were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2015, which led to the retention of the collegium system.
Way Forward
Consider revising the NJAC to address concerns about judicial independence while improving efficiency in appointments.
Engage all relevant stakeholders—judiciary, executive, civil society, and Bar Associations—in discussions to create a balanced appointment system.
Explore judicial appointment systems in other countries for best practices to improve transparency, accountability, and efficiency in India’s judicial appointments.
COMMENTS