(contd.)The govt. could make a new beginning by first taking up the other two Bills on Accountability and Inquiry. The new ‘NJAC draft Bill’ with new structure could follow which could be got concurred from the judiciary before piloting through the legislatures so that judicial review of the Act becomes mere formality. Having seen the tug of war so far, it is evident the NJAC structure has to be primarily a Collegium like structure with additional non-judicial members included for checks and balance purposes rather than for vetoing. Executive should not be part of the structure. Besides the collegiums members, LS Speaker and two more eminent members—one academician and an eminent civil society members could be co-opted by the same group that will appoint the judges. Majority decision will hold. Clear cut criteria and guidelines should be laid down for the appointments. The appointments to be forwarded to the President for getting advice from his council of ministers who could suggest changes but CJI will have the last word before approval by the President as is the practice now. After appointment the entire process should be put on the net for public scrutiny and further PIL etc.if any to bring in the element of transparency.
If 'tyranny of unelected' is not acceptable than so has to be the 'tyranny of elected' too! Not just mr Jaitely but even Ravishankar Prasad who piloted the NJAC talks about the entire country having spoken on one voice through their elected reps to replace the collegium system. Very true.But implied is only change for BETTER and not license to the 'elected' to take control of judicial appointments putting ‘judicial independence’ itself at peril as had already happened in the past especially in the seventies! Mr Prasad also asks 'what about judicial accountability '? Then why didn’t the then Law minister give priority to the other two UPA Bills on Judicial Accountability and Inquiry ahead of rushing through the more controversial NJAC giving an impression that Modi govt. was more interested in judicial appointments than in streamlining the system of judicial accountability! Unfortunately there is wide gulf in perception on the matter between the two arms on the structure of NJAC--role of law minister, other nominees, veto power, primacy of judiciary and ‘President’ acting on advice of the cabinet. Another problem is with the dominance of ‘executive’ with a clear majority over ‘parliament’ the two wings have merged to become one with the legislature virtually becoming subservient to executive and is not an independent arm any more. Modi govt. could have done better to come up with the right type of an accountabl
Re: PILOT THE JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ,INQUIRY BILLS FIRST-I
by damodaran mohan on Nov 01, 2015 06:31 PM
(contd.)..type of an accountable NJAC structure acceptable to all.
Corrupt Minister like Jaitly & other elected member want to control Judiciary can’t not be allowed. Independent Judiciary will become slave of corrupt minister then common man left no option to get justice. Everyone will become salve of politician hence Judiciary can't help common man, people to get justice. Politician will not get punished by Judiciary even after doing huge scam. Judiciary can’t be control by politician. Judiciary should be independent from politician.
Corrupt Minister like Jaitly & other elected member want to control Judiciary can’t not be allowed. Independent Judiciary will become slave of corrupt minister then common man left no option to get justice. Everyone will become salve of politician hence Judiciary can't help common man, people to get justice. Politician will not get punished by Judiciary even after doing huge scam.
remarked that the judgment by a SC bench ordering the hanging of Yakub Memon was disproportionate punishment and that the evidences presented against him were not convincing to a level normally demanded by the SC before awarding capital punishment, the BJP govt had gone all out in a big way to admonish with the argument that the SC is a sacrosanct organ of the government and that its judgments should not be questioned or remarked upon in any manner by anyone !!
Now, this motormouth Jaitley has come out and did exactly that - question a judgment of the sacrosanct SC !
motormouth has jumped out of the BJP closet to shoot himself in the foot in public !
It is one thing to bray out before the largely ignorant members of the general public that the political executive being kept away from the appointment of judges is against democracy and that one segment of the government must not be allowed primacy over all others (forgetting that he is advocating such primacy for the political executive in the process) !
But it is an entirely different matter to expect to convince or be taken seriously by anyone other than those ignorant members of the general public - especially those whose unquestioned allegiances are sworn to the BJP.
Democracy cannot mean that the political executive must be taken as the be all and end all of governance !
Democracy certainly cannot mean to suggest that every intention of the political executive will always be sacrosanct and aimed solely at the greater good of the general public just because it is elected by the people (in a *choose from those available in the list* and *first past the post* electoral system).
If it was the conviction of the founding fathers of the constitution that those elected by the people ought to enjoy untrammeled rights to decide all aspects of governance and that the judiciary must be subservient to them, they would not have built such elaborate checks and balances in the constitution they authored !
Mr. Arun Jaitley, the motormouth, ought to engage in a public debate about what he has
One can be certain that he would not have forgotten how he fared in such a debate in the not so distant past with Mr. Kapil Sibal of the Congress ! (Midway through that TV debate, Mr. Jaitley fell silent with stupefied rage at discovering that he did not have it in him to counter Mr. Sibal point for point while Mr. Sibal was systematically and very eloquently demolishing Jaitleys lame arguments !)
motormouth has jumped out of the BJP closet to shoot himself in the foot in public !
It is one thing to bray out before the largely ignorant members of the general public that the political executive being kept away from the appointment of judges is against democracy and that one segment of the government must not be allowed primacy over all others (forgetting that he is advocating such primacy for the political executive in the process) !
But it is an entirely different matter to expect to convince or be taken seriously by anyone other than those ignorant members of the general public - especially those whose unquestioned allegiances are sworn to the BJP.
Democracy cannot mean that the political executive must be taken as the be all and end all of governance !
Democracy certainly cannot mean to suggest that every intention of the political executive will always be sacrosanct and aimed solely at the greater good of the general public just because it is elected by the people (in a *choose from those available in the list* and *first past the post* electoral system).
If it was the conviction of the founding fathers of the constitution that those elected by the people ought to enjoy untrammeled rights to decide all aspects of governance and that the judiciary must be subservient to them, they would not have built such elaborate checks and balances in the constitution they authored !
Mr. Arun Jaitley, the motormouth, ought to engage in a public debate about what he has
