Collegium system opaque, Govt can’t be silent forever, says Rijiju

“Across the globe, judges do not appoint judges. But in India, they do so. Judges have to devote a lot of time to the entire process of recommending names. A lot of politics is involved in the process,” he said.

“Judges are doing so much work, nowhere in the world do judges perform as much work as judges in India. They need breaks.

They need time. They are human beings. They are not machines. Judges should be involved in work which they are expected to do. Some of my words may sound harsh, but no judge has so far told me that what I said was wrong. We are a democracy, and our sovereignty lies with the people of India. People elect their representatives who run the country,” he said.

The Law Minister said that after the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission  (NJAC) Act in 2015, the government could have taken other steps, but it respected the top court’s decision and did not act immediately to find alternate ways. He said it does not mean that “the government will be silent forever.”

He also said that the “fittest of the persons” should be elevated as judges and not those known to the Collegium.

“In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, but they did not say what is the better option. They felt that the old Collegium system should continue, but I am not satisfied with the system,” he said.

Referring to the amount of time Collegium judges spend on appointment of judges, he said judges should be more involved in adjudication work, which they are expected to do.

Stating that the judiciary should not venture into the domain of the executive, Rijiju said, “Should the judiciary run the country or the elected government? If the judiciary gets into the domain of the executive, they are venturing into a sphere where they are not supposed to.”

“A judge should speak through his/her judgments. Judges’ oral observations have no bearing on the set of things. My advice to them is that don’t come to a situation where you might invite criticism. Do not make unnecessary comments and observations.”

“If the judiciary starts framing the rules, if they start deciding where the road is to be built, if the judiciary gets into the service rules, what is the government for?” he said, citing cases related to Covid-19 matters and the Supreme Court’s decision regarding IPC section 124A on sedition.

“During Covid time, the Delhi High Court bench directed that there should be a committee of experts to run Covid affairs. Then we told the Solicitor General (Tushar Mehta), ‘Please inform the Court this is none of your business. You (judiciary) cannot do that. It is the government which is in the best position to take care of the challenges coming before us’,” he said.

He said the Supreme Court, in May this year, could have refrained from passing any order on the sedition law as the government had told the court that it was reviewing the provision. The Supreme Court put the law in abeyance and directed the Centre and state governments to refrain from registering cases under IPC section 124A.

“Despite that, the Supreme Court struck down the provisions of sedition law. I am very upset about it… If we are adamant on any subject, we are not listening to the judiciary, then the judiciary can come down heavily (on us). (But) when we have already stated that we are taking a review, we will come back with a better provision. This (sedition) is an old provision of law, which we are re-looking into. Despite that if the pronouncement comes from the court, definitely it is not a good thing… There is a Lakshman rekha for everybody. Do not cross the Lakshman rekha in the interest of the nation,” he said.

Rijiju said, “Not a single step has been taken by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government in the last eight and half years which undermines the authority of the judiciary… I firmly believe that the independence of the judiciary should be protected and promoted.”