Citizens Have Right To Know: Supreme Court Judge On Judicial Appointments

Making a call for introspection, Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said some Collegium decisions have lacked transparency, creating space for 'undesirable' candidates to enter the judiciary and make unconstitutional comments.

"I have noticed that the last three Collegium resolutions contain no reasons whatsoever. Is this a step back from the principle of transparency?" Justice Bhuyan asked.

Speaking at a discussion during the release of a report by think-tank Vidhi's JALDI initiative on Saturday, Justice Bhuyan said resolutions by the Supreme Court collegium were earlier supported by some reasons, even if they were not exhaustive.

"Some may even say they were somewhat formulaic or copy-paste in nature. But at least some reasons were given to justify the recommendations. Citizens, as we have seen, right from Plato to Bentham, have a right to know what is happening in the courts. They have a right to know who their judges are. They have a right to know what kind of judgments a judge has delivered. All this should be in the public domain," the judge maintained.

Justice Bhuyan recalled that some earlier collegium resolutions were considerably more detailed. Referring to one issued during the tenure of former Chief Justice UU Lalit in 2022, he said it contained well-reasoned justifications for the recommendations.

He also cited the Supreme Court Collegium's resolution dated January 18, 2023, reiterating the recommendation for the appointment of Saurabh Kirpal as a judge of the Delhi High Court.

"I would say the reasons given by the Supreme Court are quite convincing. At least, I am convinced by the reasoning," Justice Bhuyan observed. He, however, noted that despite the reiteration, the recommendation has remained pending for over three years. "It is another matter that three and a half years have gone by, and nothing has happened thereafter. But that is a different debate and not part of today's conversation. We can have that discussion some other time," he said.

'Opacity'

Justice Bhuyan observed that the failure to disclose reasons in collegium proposals concerning the appointment of judges does a great disservice to judges and goes against public interest. He added that this opens the door for undesirable candidates.

"By not giving reasons, the institution actually does a disservice to many judges who are genuinely outstanding and have done tremendous work. Conversely, by withholding reasons, we also create space for individuals to enter the judiciary who may later describe groups of people (with references to their treatment of) 'ants' and make other remarks that are wholly unconstitutional and contrary to the values of the Constitution," remarked Justice Bhuyan.

Replying to a question by Bar and Bench on what he was referring to, Justice Bhuyan said the remarks were in the context of a former Allahabad High Court judge's comments and were not directed at any other member of the judiciary.

Speaking at a VHP event in 2024, the former High Court judge had made certain veiled references to Muslims.

"In our country, we are taught not to harm even the smallest animals, not to kill ants. But in your culture, from a young age, children are exposed to the slaughter of animals. How can you expect them to be tolerant and compassionate?" he had asked.