Behind SC no: Govt won’t give in writing reason for security veto

The judiciary has had several rounds of “informal” discussions with senior government functionaries but is not convinced with the government’s reasoning.

Written by Maneesh Chhibber | New Delhi | Updated: March 27, 2017 12:58 pm
supreme court, acid attack, acid attack punishment, arun mishra, supreme court, supreme court acid attack, exemplary punishment, indian express news, india news The Supreme Court. (File Photo)

Earlier this month, when the Supreme Court collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India J S Khehar, rejected the Centre’s recommendation that the government should have the power to reject any name for appointment as a judge of the high court for reasons of “national security”, it followed in the footsteps of former CJI T S Thakur who had rejected such a veto in the proposed Memorandum of Procedure (MoP).

It is now learnt that the reason why the Supreme Court collegium, under Justice Thakur and now CJI Khehar, took this stand is because the government said if it rejects a candidate on grounds of national security, it will not give in writing the evidence that forms the basis of its decision.

Sources said the government is not inclined to share the evidence in writing because that can also adversely impact the candidate’s standing as a lawyer. The government, sources said, is not averse to the idea of showing the evidence to the CJI who can then inform his collegium colleagues. But CJI Khehar, like Justice Thakur, is not ready to accept this, sources said.

The judiciary has had several rounds of “informal” discussions with senior government functionaries but is not convinced with the government’s reasoning.

The collegium is of the view that making recommendations is a collective decision of the entire collegium and all members should be aware of the entire material about a candidate before making an informed choice. The collegium, sources said, is also of the view that if the government gives the reasons in writing, the charge can be verified through independent sources.

Letting the government impact the appointment process through the national security clause without giving in writing the grounds will only mean handing over the veto to the government.

Incidentally, to convince the collegium to accept the national security clause, the government has said it has so far not rejected any recommendation on national security grounds. It has assured the collegium that in future too, the clause will be invoked sparingly.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App now

First Published on: March 27, 2017 4:26 am
  1. A
    Ang
    Mar 27, 2017 at 1:11 am
    So the GoI can be called a coward?
    Reply
    1. J
      Joseph R Stephen
      Mar 27, 2017 at 4:21 am
      This is like Trump saying he is great and can do anything.lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Look at US courts they have told their president no one is above the LAW !!!lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;That is the country and that is more than a country our Mahatma hi gave us.lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;People should stand up and say no to any kind of dictators trying to take powers from people and the country.
      Reply
      1. P
        Pankaj Rai
        Mar 27, 2017 at 2:30 am
        The track record of the collegium in appointing judges in an opaque manner has raised questions. Secondly, the appointment of judges by judges is against the spirit of the Consution and negation of the principle of 'separation of power'. If the Government remains firm, the collegium will have to agree. Some checks and balance are necessary given that the judiciary lacks accountability and the widespread adjournments cause acute to lakhs of citizens across the country.
        Reply
        1. R
          Ram Pathak
          Mar 27, 2017 at 5:13 am
          SC is being dicarial and hegmonistic to retain absolute power
          Reply
          1. R
            Ravishankar Balasubramanian
            Mar 27, 2017 at 5:11 am
            Wow, what a reasoning. So a criminal (Or a person who can be a threat to national security) can conduct as a lawyer, but not as a judge in the opinion of chor Modi.lt;br/gt;Spell it out, you want a person who will lik ur as*. And anybody who challenges your move is a threat to national security. All the social network people good job on selecting a great leader.
            Reply
            1. K
              Karthik
              Mar 27, 2017 at 4:32 am
              So Modi regime not only wants its say but wants to be the "final word" in all insutions.lt;br/gt;Shows its insecurity/fear .
              Reply
              1. S
                Swamy
                Mar 27, 2017 at 6:36 am
                Government is trying to take control of all seats of power from Loksabha to Rajya Sabha, presidency and Supreme Court.BJP/RSS wanst Dawn of Manuwaad where Sambuka ears will be filled with Molten Lead and no one to hear call of Justice.lt;br/gt;Judiciary is the only place where poor and suppressed have faith in.
                Reply
                1. S
                  Swamy
                  Mar 27, 2017 at 6:39 am
                  Saffrons turn and twist according to situation and time.One day is Sab ka saath, other day its jo saath nahin uska Vinash.Wait for the proper time to M000dyji will show His true colors as Brutal Dictator on Socialism, He will rule with an undeclared Emergency.
                  Reply
                  1. Load More Comments