Sir — This refers to views expressed by eminent jurists and others in a high-level meet on July 28 the Government had called to discuss the selection-mode in the higher judiciary. While almost all those present agreed on the formation of a Judicial Appointments Commission to replace the existing collegiums-system, there was an opinion-difference on the constitution of the proposed JAC, with some favouring it to be dominated by judges while the others wanting the legislature to have a decisive say.
It is best to have a coordinated formula whereby the JAC can have retired Supreme Court judges as its member-nominees of the Prime Minister, the leader of biggest Opposition party in the lok Sabha, Chief Justice of India and Bar Council of India. The Central Vigilance Commissioner can be the member-secretary of JAC. Such a formation will provide a judicially-refined say of the legislature in the appointment of judges. Otherwise also, appointing sitting judges in the JAC will adversely affect functioning of already over-burdened judiciary.
Also since inquiry commissions set up by political rulers, even though these panels are headed by retired judges, are usually an eye-wash with panels generally giving findings in tune with the requirement of political rulers that have appointed them, the JAC should be the only authority to suggest names of retired judges in all judicial panels appointed by the Centre and/or States.
The BJP Government should follow its own line when then leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley had suggested a ban of two years in postings of retiring judges.