Opinion |
Over the last two decades, the attention devoted to the role of the judiciary has increased almost exponentially. It is rare for a day to pass without at least a couple of front page stories in our national dailies devoted to what transpired in the constitutional courts. Even as I write this, the cameras are slowly turning towards the Supreme Court to see how the Maharashtra imbroglio will play out. It is not surprising, therefore, that the events at court invite opinions and views, many of them from those who ply their trade within those hallowed portals (which includes this writer). Most of these pieces are devoted to specific judgments and ephemeral events, but ever so often, we see one that deals with institutional issues — larger malaises that need to be addressed — and then, we consider those suggestions through a wider lens.
One of these is Sriram Panchu’s article ‘A wish list for reform in India’s higher judiciary’ (published in The Hindu on June 22, 2022). There are, of course, a couple of good points made (even if I were to ignore the rumour he refers to in the first paragraph) – that the retirement age of all judges should be on par and that there is no reason to believe that judges lose their abilities in their early sixties. These issues are not new, though, having been raised 50 years ago by the Law Commission of India in its 58th Report, and then again in the Constitution (114th Amendment) Bill, 2010, which subsequently lapsed.
