Under fire, govt may give CJI constitutional status in JAC
- Gujjars intensify agitation for job quota, block Delhi-Mumbai rail track
- Video: Mumbai graduate denied job for being Muslim, Minorities Commission seeks explanation from company
- Geelani's 'incomplete' passport application cannot be processed: MEA
- Manish Sisodia launches counter-attack, says AAP govt trying to stop officers' transfer-posting industry
- 'You are the apple of my eye': Osama bin Laden's son's letter to wife
The government is said to have decided to give constitutional status to the Chief Justice of India as the head of the proposed Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) which will appoint judges to the higher judiciary.
The move comes in the light of continued criticism that the legislation that proposes to replace the collegium system of appointing judges to the higher judiciary does not safeguard the position of the CJI in the new system.
Law Minister Kapil Sibal is learnt to have told senior officials in his ministry that to end the confusion over the status of the CJI in the JAC, he might add a clause to this effect when the Constitution (120th Amendment) Bill, 2013, which was passed by Rajya Sabha on September 5, comes to the Lok Sabha in the winter session of Parliament.
Under the current format, while the constitutional amendment does away with the collegium system, bringing in the JAC, the structure and composition of the JAC is provided for in the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill, 2013. However, this provision can later be amended through a simple majority in both houses.
The JAC will be a six-member body with the CJI as its chairperson. The other members will be the two most senior Supreme Court judges after the CJI, the union law minister and two eminent persons nominated by a collegium consisting of the Prime Minister, the CJI and leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha.
Several jurists and legal experts, including NHRC chairperson and former CJI K G Balakrishnan and former CJI M N Venkatachaliah, have opposed the Bill in its present form, underscoring the vulnerable position of the CJI as the chairperson of the JAC.