RAW Reports For Appointing Judges Sought Only In Extraordinary Circumstances Involving National Security: Law Ministry

The Law Ministry has disclosed that generally, it is not a practice to seek R&AW reports on proposals for appointment of judges in the High Courts and the Supreme Court.

It is only in extraordinary circumstances, involving issues related to national security, that RAW reports are sought, it added.

The statements assume significance as the SC Collegium recently dismissed Centre's objection to appoint gay Advocate Saurabh Kirpal as a Judge of the Delhi High Court, based on RAW reports mentioning his openness about his sexual orientation and his partnership with a Swiss national, raising apprehensions about national security.

The SC had said there is no reason to pre-suppose that the partner of the candidate, who is a Swiss National, would be inimically disposed to our country, since the country of his origin is a friendly nation.

"Many persons in high positions including present and past holders of constitutional offices have and have had spouses who are foreign Nationals. Hence, as a matter of principle, there can be no objection to the candidature of Shri Saurabh Kirpal on the ground that his partner is a foreign National," SC Collegium had said.

It is in this backdrop that Congress MP Manish Tewari had asked in Lok Sabha whether it is the practice of the Government to use R&AW reports for appointment of judges.

"Generally, it is not a practice to seek R&AW reports on proposals for appointment of judges in the High Courts and the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances, involving issues related to national security," the Ministry said.

It added, "the proposals recommended by the High Court Collegium for appointment as High Court Judges, are to be considered in the light of such other reports/inputs as may be available to the Government for assessing the suitability in respect of the names under consideration.Accordingly, IB inputs are obtained and provided to the SCC for making assessment on the recommendees."

Tewari also sought to know whether the sexual orientation of an Indian citizen is legally/constitutionally germane to their nomination as a judge.

Centre said the most important personal qualifications required for appointment as judge include "moral vigour, ethical firmness and imperviousness to corrupting or venal influences" etc.

Tewari's questions also seemingly referred to Centre's objection to elevate Advocate R. John Sathyan as a Madras High Court Judge, citing an online article shared by hi which was critical of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He asked whether the Government takes into consideration Political leanings and online posts for consideration of appointment of judges?

Centre in response cited Supreme Court's recent decision in Victoria Gowri's case where it was held that political background by itself has not been an absolute bar to appointment of otherwise a suitable person.

"The Supreme Court Collegium has also opined that political leanings or expression of views by a candidate does not disentitle him to hold a constitutional office so long as the person proposed for judgeship is a person of competence, merit and integrity," it added.