Sanyal flayed for comments on judiciary
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Vikas Singh has strongly criticised economist and PM’s Economic Advisory Council member Sanjeev Sanyal for describing the judiciary as the “biggest hurdle” in India’s journey towards becoming Viksit Bharat. Singh called the comment “irresponsible” and “made in bad taste,” asserting that such observations betray a lack of understanding of how the courts function.
Speaking in response to Sanyal’s remarks, Singh said that the economist remarks are just misleading and irresponsible, while sitting at responsible positions like PM’s advisory council. “To say that judiciary is responsible for India’s developmental hurdle is very immature.
The greater part of the ills in the system is actually because of the Government,” said Singh. On the criticism of judicial vacations, Singh explained that breaks for judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are not leisure but essential to sustain the “gruelling” workload of judging.
He pointed out that judges spend weekends reading case files and writing judgments, and without periodic breaks, there would be “a classic case of burnout.”
He added that bureaucrats who criticise vacations often realise the intensity of judicial work only when they themselves serve on tribunals. Singh said that delays in justice delivery are often linked to inadequate infrastructure, low judicial salaries, and lack of quality appointments — areas where the Government plays a decisive role.
Singh noted that the Government frequently withholds or selectively clears collegium recommendations, leading to “poor appointments” in the higher judiciary. “If the Government really wants to strengthen the judiciary, it must provide adequate infrastructure, better pay for judges and a credible appointment process. Otherwise, blaming the judiciary alone is neither fair nor responsible,” said the top court Bar Association President.
Reacting to Sanyal’s criticism about addressing Judges as “My Lords”, “Your Lordships” etc., Singh said that such forms of address were only a part of legacy and did not mean much. It was just a habit formed by lawyers over the years and he agreed that it can be done away with.
Calling for reforms, Singh suggested that the Government could introduce a law to regulate the Collegium system and ensure transparency in judicial appointments without undermining judicial independence, instead of deflecting responsibility onto the courts.
Singh pointed out that the NJAC was struck down only on the ground that the executive had the upper hand in deciding the appointments. Why not the Government bring a law which will ensure a transparent method of appointments without compromising the judiciary’s primacy, he asked.
