Every institution can be improved, but it doesn't mean it is fundamentally flawed: CJI
Mumbai (PTI): Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud has said every institution can be improved, but it should not lead to a conclusion that there is something fundamentally wrong with it.
He was talking about the collegium system on Saturday during an interaction after delivering the inaugural lecture in a series organised by the Marathi daily `Loksatta' here.
To a question on the collegium system of appointment of Supreme Court and High Court judges, the CJI said it is a federal system where the responsibility has been given to different levels of governments (both the Centre and the states) and the judiciary.
"It is a process of consultative dialogue, where consensus emerges, but at times there is no consensus, but that's part of the system. We must have the maturity to understand that this represents the strength of our system," Chandrachud said.
"I wish, we will be able to foster a greater consensus, but the point of the matter is, this is dealt with a very great level of maturity on the parts of different levels within the judiciary and different levels within the governments," he added.
If there is an objection about a particular candidate, discussions take place with a "very great deal of maturity", the chief justice noted.
"We have to understand that it is very easy to criticise the institution that we have formed....every institution is capable of betterment. But the very fact that there are institutional improvements, which are possible, should not lead us to a conclusion that there is something fundamentally wrong with the institution," he said.
"The fact that these institutions have stood the test of time for over the last 75 years is a reason for us to trust our system of democratic governance of which judiciary is well a part," he added.
To another question, the chief justice said unlike in other fields, the work burden of a judge increases both in terms of volume and complexity as he or she rises in the judiciary.
"Our judges are not galivanting or goofing up even in the vacation, they are deeply committed to the work they do," he said.
The orders they pass will define the country in next decades, but judges hardly get time to think or read about law (aside from their work), the chief justice said.
"....do we give our judges sufficient time to think or read about the law or do you just want them to be merely a mechanical machine in the disposal of cases," he asked.
Despite its drawbacks, the emergence of social media is good for society, CJI Chandrachud said.
"The whole universe of judging, I believe, has undergone changes due to social media. Judges have to be very careful about what they say, use appropriate language," he said.
"I still feel that the advent of social media is good for society, as it enables the user to reach a huge section of society," he remarked.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Sujit Nair raises concerns over speculation of DMK-AIADMK understanding to block TVK
Chennai: Journalist and political commentator Sujit Nair has expressed concern over speculation that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam could explore a post-poll understanding to prevent Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam from forming the government in Tamil Nadu.
In a social media post, Sujit Nair said the election verdict in Tamil Nadu reflected a clear public demand for political change and argued that the mandate should be respected irrespective of political preferences.
Referring to reports and political discussions surrounding a possible understanding between the DMK and AIADMK, he said he hoped such developments remained only speculative conversations and did not turn into reality.
Nair stated that if such an alliance were to take shape, it would raise serious questions about ideological politics in the country. He said TVK had emerged through a democratic electoral process and that the legitimacy to govern in a parliamentary democracy comes from the people’s verdict.
According to him, attempts to prevent an electoral winner from forming the government through unexpected political arrangements may be constitutionally valid, but many people could view them as politically opportunistic.
He further said that such a move could particularly affect the political image of the DMK, which has historically projected itself around ideology, social justice and opposition politics. Nair said that in ideological terms, the DMK appeared closer to TVK than to the AIADMK, and joining hands with its long-time political rival only to remain in power could weaken its broader political narrative.
He added that the same questions would apply to the AIADMK as well, as the party had spent decades positioning itself against the DMK and such an arrangement could create discomfort among its cadre and supporters.
Drawing a comparison with Maharashtra politics in 2019, Nair said he had expressed similar views when the Shiv Sena formed an alliance with the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party after the Assembly elections.
He said post-poll alliances between long-standing political rivals often create a public perception that ideology and electoral mandates become secondary when political power equations come into play.
Nair also said such developments increase public cynicism towards politics and reinforce the belief among voters that ideology is often sidelined after elections.
He maintained that the Tamil Nadu verdict was emphatic and said respecting both the spirit and substance of the mandate was important for the credibility of democratic politics.
