Though Chief Justice of India-designate P. Sathasivam has opposed any move to change the collegium system of appointment of judges, there is a strong view in the government that it must have a say in the selection process as it is an equal stake-holder.
"The appointment of judges to higher judiciary should be a collaborative effort as all, including the executive, have a stake in it. We are equal stake-holders," said a highly-placed law ministry source speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Both Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah and Justice J.S. Verma - the architects of the collegium system of appointment of judges - have written a "formal letter regretting their judgment", the source said.
"Why can't government suggest the name of a lawyer to be considered for appointment as a judge and if the suggested name does not merit consideration by the collegium, then the same can be dropped," the source said.
"I must have an equal say. If I have a good name to suggest, I must have the opportunity to suggest that name."
Advocating that the composition of the higher judiciary should be reflective of the complex reality of the Indian society, the source claimed that at present, a good number of people being appointed judges are either (erstwhile) juniors or relatives of the judges.
"They (the judiciary) are the most non-transparent institution in India."
The dossiers of the judges, the source said, who are sought to be elevated or people sought to appointed judges should be made public so that people should know about their knowledge of law and constitutional matters, their writing skills and command over language.
"System should be evolved so that there can be an objective assessment of a person to be appointed to the higher judiciary and it has to be a collaborative effort between the judiciary and the executive," the ministry source said.
Taking a dig at the collegium system, the source said: "If you compare the judges appointed by the executive (government) and those appointed by the collegium system, the quality of judges appointed by the executive was much better."
The ministry appears to be equally cool to Justice Sathasivam's advocacy of fixed two-year term for the Chief Justice of India. "I don't think government has given any thought to it. There is an expectation (of a judge) and if they get (to be Chief Justice) even for one month, they have achieved their ambition."
Suggestion for a fixed term for the Chief Justice of India could not be compared with the fixed term for officials such as the cabinet secretary or defence secretary as they are part of the decision-making process whereas judges decides cases, the source said.
