Judicial Appointments and Constitutionalism: Collegium System vs. NJAC

Written by: Ganesh Sanap, LL.M. (1^st Year), Modern Law College, Pune

Abstract

This paper critically examines the enduring debate between the collegium system and the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) mechanism for judicial appointments in India. While the collegium system emerged as a judicial innovation to uphold the independence of the judiciary, it has faced severe criticism for its opacity and allegations of nepotism. The NJAC, enacted through the Ninety-Ninth Constitutional Amendment, offered a participatory model involving the executive and eminent persons. However, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC, citing its potential to undermine the Constitution’s basic structure—particularly judicial independence. Through a comprehensive analysis of constitutional provisions, judicial precedents, committee recommendations, and statutory frameworks, this paper argues that any meaningful reform must enhance transparency without compromising the foundational tenet of judicial independence. The findings suggest that although the collegium system is flawed, the NJAC’s structure entrusts undue power to the executive, violating the doctrine of separation of powers and the basic structure of the Constitution.

Key Words: Judicial Appointments, Collegium System, National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), Judicial Independence, Basic Structure Doctrine, Constitution of India, Supreme Court, Constitutional Amendments, Executive Influence, Separation of Powers

GANESH.pdf

Download PDF • 499KB

Volume 1 | Issue 6