The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Bill 2014 was passed by the Rajya Sabha today, including a Lok Sabha amendment from yesterday by senior Congress politician and former law minister Veerappa Moily to restrict the government’s effective veto over new appointments.
The upper house cleared the bill by 179 votes in favour with senior counsel and BJP politician Ram Jethmalani being the only member abstaining, reported the PTI. The bill will now have to be ratified by 50 per cent of states, which could take up to eight months.
The draft that was tabled before the Lok Sabha had included a provision to allow any one of the six members of the NJAC, which includes the law minister, to veto a judge’s appointment after the president’s request to reconsider their recommendation, reported the Economic Times.
This would have effectively given the government all the cards necessary to kill off any judicial appointment single-handedly.
Moily’s amendment, as reflected in the latest draft (via PRS Legislative Research), merely requires the NJAC to reiterate its recommendation under the usual process after the president asks for reconsideration.
This would mean that at least two members’ dissenting votes would be needed to scupper an appointment.
The NJAC will consist of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), two next senior-most Supreme Court judges, the law minister, and two “eminent persons”, who will be nominated by the prime minister, the Chief Justice of India and the leader of the opposition. One member must be a minority or a woman.
Senior advocate Fali Nariman Told Headlines Today that he and other lawyers could challenge the bill in court for allowing two members to veto appointments and for not having enough judges on the JAC.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
Makes one think, doesn't it? Going out on a limb here, Kian, to do some analysis for you.
Perhaps -
1. the LegallyIndia audience comprises of an overwhelming majority of (frustrated) corporate lawyers looking for opportunities to vent
2. most visitors on LegallyIndia don't really care about legal academic / court matters because they have little to do with the actual judicial/ legal system - for them Judges are just names printed in the header of their research documents
3. LegallyIndia should ponder over why, despite nearly every lawyer (corporate/ actual court work) using a computer and the internet, the audience on LegallyIndia is skewed? To me it seems it may be because of the low threshold LegallyIndia sets while choosing its 'stars' and 'heroes' - students recruited at law firms, an average corporate lawyer closing an irrelevant small volume deal, a mediocre lawyer graduating to partnership, etc are all very newsworthy.
Here's a thought - what if Kian's team used their position to actually make a difference? Give equal internet-space to the deserving few working hard in low paying litigation jobs - the ones who actually influence how good or bad, well or poorly the judicial system functions!
PS - No disrespect intended; I am a corporate lawyer who has seen the light of day.
But comments aren't necessarily reflective of readership - it could just be that a lot of these issues are so mainstream and debated to death in the mainstream media, that most lawyers aren't that interested in dissecting them again on LI, when they've talked and read about them all day already...?
Agree that it would be nice to have some intelligent discourse on litigation topics too though...
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first