Transaparancy in Confering ‘Senior Advocate’ Designation
iasparliament
October 24, 2017
What is the issue?
Supreme Court has laid down guidelines for designating lawyers in the Supreme Court and High Courts as senior advocates.
SC’s senior advocate guidelines can be used to guide collegium in judges’ selection too.
What is the new process?
Previously, the judges of the SC and HC had the sole discretion of according this status to advocates.
Now, applications will be vetted by a permanent committee known as the Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates.
Members - It will have 5 members and a permanaent secretariat.
The committee will consist of the Cheif Justic of India, two senior-most judges of the SC/HC, ‘Attorney General of India’ or ‘Advocate General of State’.
Additionally a person from the Bar will be nominated by the above mentioned members as a 5th member.
Assessment - The committee will compile all the relevant candidate information and examine his case.
It with regard to the reputation, conduct, integrity, free legal work, judgments in cases for which the advocate has appeared etc...
The committee will examine each candidate’s case, interview the candidate, and make its evaluation.
This system is transparent and objective, and provides equal opportunity to all candidates.
Cons - There is a proposal to publish names online for inviting complaints & suggestions ensuring better transparency.
This may find some opposition with regard to privacy.
There have also been reports of motivated complaints & objections.
The secretariat might be dragged into the dilemma of investigating frivolous complaints or objections.
Can this be considered for Judicial Appointments?
Currently appointments to the higher judiciary is through a non-transaparent collegiums system.
The institutional mechanism for conferring senior Advocate status also seems suited to substitute the existing collegium system.
Hence, the sooner the judiciary adopts such a mechanism for judges too, the better it is for the institution.
What is the current scenario in Judical Appoinments?
Political interference in the selection of judges in the 1970s, forced the evolution of collegium system.
However, the opaqueness and unsatisfactory selection, transfer, and elevation of judges to the Supreme Court caused friction.
This led to the passing of the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014 that called for the establishment of National Judicial Appointments Commission - NJAC.
NJAC sought to give politicians and civil society a final say in the appointment of judges to the highest courts.
In 2015, a Constitution Bench of the SC declared NJAC unconstitutional on the ground that it interefered with judicial independence.
