Justice Bhuyan questions Supreme Court collegium’s lack of reasons in judicial appointments

Raising serious concerns over transparency in judicial appointments, Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Satueday questioned the recent practice of the Supreme Court Collegium issuing recommendations for the elevation of judges without disclosing the reasons behind its decisions.Speaking at the launch of Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy's JALDI report, The Judicial Transparency Index, Justice Bhuyan asked whether the judiciary was "taking a step back from the principle of transparency" by omitting reasons in its latest Collegium resolutions.'Are We Taking A Step Back From Transparency?'Justice Bhuyan noted that earlier Collegium resolutions recommending judges for elevation typically contained at least brief explanations, even if they were "formulaic" or appeared repetitive. However, he said the last three Collegium resolutions recommending judicial appointments were issued without any reasons whatsoever.Questioning the shift, he said the move raised concerns about whether the institution was retreating from its commitment to transparency.Citizens Have A Right To Know Their JudgesEmphasising the importance of openness in judicial appointments, Justice Bhuyan said citizens have the right to know who is being elevated to constitutional courts and the work that justifies their selection.He stressed that information relating to judges and the nature of their judgments should remain in the public domain, adding that transparency strengthens public confidence in the judiciary.Lack Of Reasons Hurts Merit, Enables Unsuitable AppointmentsJustice Bhuyan argued that withholding reasons does a disservice to deserving judges by failing to acknowledge their outstanding judicial work.At the same time, he warned that the absence of transparency could create room for less suitable candidates to enter the judiciary. Referring to controversial judicial remarks made in the past, he said some individuals had gone on to describe groups of people using expressions such as "ants" and made observations that were "wholly unconstitutional and contrary to the values of the Constitution.""By not giving reasons, the institution actually does a disservice to many judges who are genuinely outstanding... Conversely, we also create space for individuals to enter the judiciary who may later make remarks that are wholly unconstitutional."Earlier Collegium Resolutions Offered Clearer JustificationDrawing comparisons with previous practices, Justice Bhuyan cited Collegium resolutions issued during the tenure of former Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, saying they contained more detailed reasoning.He also referred to the January 18, 2023 Collegium resolution reiterating the recommendation of Saurabh Kirpal for appointment to the Delhi High Court, describing it as an example of a recommendation backed by convincing and well-articulated reasons.Calls For Greater Transparency In Collegium SystemJustice Bhuyan also flagged broader issues concerning the functioning of the Collegium, including the confidentiality surrounding deliberations on judicial elevations and transfers, the rare disclosure of reasons for rejecting or deferring candidates, and the absence of clearly codified and publicly accessible selection criteria beyond the limited provisions contained in the Memorandum of Procedure.SC Examines High Court Order Quashing Case Against Bhagwant Mann & Other AAP Leaders His remarks came during a panel discussion at the launch of The Judicial Transparency Index: Assessing Disclosure of Information by the Supreme Court and the High Courts, a report prepared by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy's JALDI initiative.The observations have reignited the debate over transparency and accountability in India's Collegium system, with Justice Bhuyan suggesting that openness in judicial appointments is essential to preserving public trust and strengthening the credibility of the institution.

Justice Ujjal Bhuyan questioned the Supreme Court collegium's lack of transparency in judicial appointments. He noted that recent collegium resolutions provided no reasons for their decisions. This opacity, he argued, could allow unsuitable individuals to enter the judiciary. Citizens possess a right to know deliberations concerning judicial elevations and transfers. The JALDI report highlights varying transparency levels across India's higher courts.