"Collegium System Is Opaque & Unaccountable; Judges & Lawyers Also Think So": Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju

Continuing to voice his opinion regarding the Collegium System on public forums, the Union Law Minister on Friday once again said that the System is opaque and the majority of the Judges also believe so.

However, he did add that he has to work with this system despite not being satisfied with it till the Government comes out with an alternative mechanism. Law Minister Rijiju was speaking at the India Today conclave in Mumbai

"I am not critical about the Judiciary or the Judges but I state a fact which is the reflection of the thinking of the common people of India... The Collegium system is opaque and isn't accountable. Judges & Lawyers too believe this," said the Union Law Minister.

He further said that when the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC, the Government could have taken other steps, but the Government respected the Court and did not act immediately, however, he did add that it doesn't mean that it will be silent forever.

He also said that the fittest of the persons should be elevated as judges and not the persons who are chosen by the collegium system. Praising that the Judges of India do comparatively more work when compared with the judges of foreign countries, he said that the judges should be involved in the work that they are expected to do.

"Across the globe, the Judges do not appoint the judges, but in India, they do so. The Judges have to devote a lot of time to the entire process of recommending names. A lot of politics is involved in the process. Judges are doing so much work, nowhere in the world, do the judges perform as much work as performed by 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."

He also said that some of his words may sound harsh, but no judge has so far told him that what he was saying is wrong.

Further, he also opined that the Judiciary should not enter into the space of the executive as they are not supposed to do so as per the Constitution of India, which clearly lays demarcates the functioning areas of the 3 wings of the state.

"If the Judiciary starts deciding where the roads should be built if it gets into the service rules, what is the government for? During the COVID time, the Delhi High Court had directed the formation of a committee to run COVID affairs, then we asked our Solitiatar General to tell the court that it is none of their (the Court's) business. You can't do that. The govt is in the best position to deal with such challenges...Do I ever get involved with the Judiciary's work? I Don't. I assist the Judiciary to make it a robust institution."

He also opined that only in very serious cases, the bail pleas should reach the Supreme Court as it is the job of the lower courts to deal with bail pleas. He also wondered why every case is required to be listed. 

"If you look at the number of cases pending, more than half of the cases do not deserve to be listed. Every bail petition is going to #SupremeCourt, why should it be made to hear bail pleas? Such petitions are to be dealt with by the lower courts. Very limited cases (bail pleas) should come to the High Court, forget the Supreme Court. Why should it be made to deal with bail pleas unless the case is related to the death penalty or some serious offence...Many cases are frivolous. When PILs become Personal Interest Litigation, then the court has to decide that the matter is not worthy of being listed. I don't know why everything has to go to the Court"