Need to rework the compositions of the committees, and broaden the scope in/of the proposed law

The introduction of the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010 in the ongoing winter session of Parliament is laudable. The majesty and sanctity of the judiciary rest on the respect and confidence it enjoys among the people. The Bill seeks to ensure greater judicial accountability and transparency. It provides for provisions for declaration of assets and liabilities of judges of higher judiciary, and a mechanism to tame the judicial indiscipline and corruption even at the instance of an ordinary private person. It provides for setting up of a broad based “National Judicial Oversight Committee”(NJOC) and an all Judges “Scrutiny Committee”.The NJOC would consist of a retired Chief Justice of India (CJI), a Judge of the SC and the Chief Justice (CJ) of a HC. The Attorney General would be the ex-officio member and an eminent person would be nominated by the President as its member. The Scrutiny Committee for the SC would consist of a former CJI and two Judges of the SC. The Scrutiny Committee for the HCs would consist of a former CJ of that HC and two Judges of that HC.
The NJOC would first refer the complaints to the appropriate Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee would submit their reports to the NJOC within a maximum period of three months. The NJOC would constitute an investigation committee to go into the complaints recommended by the Scrutiny Committee. The NJOC and investigations committees would have the power to summon persons from any part of India and ask for any public record. The investigation committee would also have the power of “search and seizure.”
Under Clause 34 of the proposed Act, the NJOC would have the power to dismiss complaints or impose minor penalties such as warnings and advisories. If the charges were of the “serious nature warranting” removal, it could request the Judge to voluntarily resign “and if he fails to do so, then advise the President accordingly who shall refer the matter to the Parliament.”
However, needless to emphasize that Judicial accountability, transparency and independence are interwoven. To protect the sacrosanct “Independence of Judiciary”, the final decision making body i.e. NJOC should comprise of all judges. Hence, if a complaint is against a Supreme Court judge, the NJOC should consist of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the four senior most Supreme Court judges. If the complaint is against a High Court judge, the NJOC should consist of the CJI, two senior most Supreme Court judges and two senior most High Court Chief Justices. The Chief Justice of India should be the Chairman of this Committee. Further, the Scrutiny Committee should be broad based and it could have one member as a Chief Justice of India or his nominee, two Members as the Speaker, Lok Sabha and Chairman, Rajya Sabha or their nominees. There could be one nominated representative of the Prime Minister and one representative of the Bar Council of India. An outstanding law academician could also be the member. He may be elected by the Confederation of Law Colleges, the department of Laws of various Universities (including private and deemed universities), the specialized Law Universities (National Law Schools) and deemed Law Universities like Indian Law Institute, Delhi.
Moreover, the matter of appointment of the judges in higher judiciary could also be entrusted to a wider body other than the present collegium with representation from the judiciary, the executive and legislature and civil society. It is suggested that it could be entrusted to the suggested restructured "Scrutiny Committee" which could initially screen the names and thereafter, refer the same to the NJOC for final recommendation (hitherto now recommendations are made by the Supreme Court Collegium. It is noteworthy that composition of the suggested restructured NJOC and the extant Supreme Court Collegium is mostly the same). In case of appointment of judges in the High Court, the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court and the Chief Minister of the State where that High Court is situated should also be the Members. The matter of the transfer of the Judges/Chief Justices of the High Courts should be entrusted to the NJOC only without any interference of the Scrutiny Committee and its decision should be final.
Under the proposed law, the Higher Judiciary including the office of the Chief Justice of India should specifically be made amenable to the command of the Right to Information Act.