Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1. 2. 3.
4.
Conclusion.
Constitution of USA:
Article II Section 2: The President shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Judges of the Supreme Court.
Excerpt from Article 124(2): Judges shall hold office until the age of 65 years.
Article III Section 3: Judges shall hold their Offices during good behaviour.
(Please Note: No statutory retirement age, Judges can continue to hold office for a lifetime.)
Article 124(3) (a)&(b): Prescribes certain criteria to qualify for appointment as a Judge. Article 124 (4): Judges shall be removed by the President after a vote in both the houses of Parliament, as per the procedure laid down under the Article.
Article .. NO QUALIFYING CRITERIA LAID DOWN. Article II - Section 4: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Nominate
most imp
Select
less imp
Appoint
least imp
Step 1. Nomination (most important): A Wide step, open to all the eligible citizen candidates, from which a short-list of nominees is to be drawn. Step 2. Selection (less important): Choice before a selection authority is limited to the short-listed nominees offered from Step 1. Step 3. Finally, Appointment (least important): Choice almost absolutely limited to the selection made in Step 2.
(For the sake of understanding an appointment process, consider the following simple example: Have you ever observed the popular Film Fare Award Process that is televised every year? First there are 4 to 5 nominations announced > Next the selection of a winner has to be from the nominees just announced > And finally the selected awardee is presented with the award trophy! There may be tens of movies made in a particular year, but the selection of an awardee can never happen from outside the list of nominees!)
INDIA
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Appointment. Removal. Age Limit. Qualifications. Procedure followed.
3. Comparisons
USA
Executive is the clear Designated Authority responsible for proposing Judicial Nominees.
N.B: Some important facts about the Judicial Nomination Procedure in India: For nominations to any Public Office under the State: As per Article 16(1), the nominations should be invited by giving equality of opportunity to all the eligible citizens, which as per numerous judgments of the Supreme Court of India, mean that nominations should be invited by giving open advertisements in news papers. Please Note - Art.16 (1) is presently not being followed while making Judicial Appointments.
Its a big secret as to who suggests/submits the list of Judicial Nominees before the selection authority, and as such, I would like to believe, that implicitly, it may be the Judiciary which nominates the prospective judicial candidates for itself.
3.1.2. Selection:
Executive Judiciary.
to
consult
with
the
Appointment of Judges = Judiciary + Executive. Legislature is out of loop while making a judicial appointment.
3.1.3. Appointment
INDIA
USA
Judges shall be removed on proved Judges shall be removed from the misbehaviour or incapacity by a office on impeachment. It is a two majority of total membership + 2/3rd step procedure passing through both of those present in each of the houses the houses of Legislature. i.e. both the houses of Legislature. (Difficulty Level of Removal = (Difficulty Level of Removal = Extremely High)
INDIA
Extremely High)
USA
3.4 Qualifications:
Basic necessary requirements laid down under Article 124(3) (a) & (b), to qualify for appointment as a Judge. Although, Article 124(3) (c) gives the President of India discretion to overrule the criteria laid down in 124(3) (a) & (b). No statutory qualifications.
INDIA
USA
At the present moment The Procedure followed is very elaborate: the procedure followed In the event of a Judicial Vacancy: for Nomination & Executive forwards the requirement to the Department of Justice. Department of Justice follows a detailed procedure candidate, Having nominated a candidate, his name is forwarded to: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for Investigation, American Bar Association (An and nominates a prospective
SECRET.
Sorry, I lack knowledge about what to elaborate except that there is some collegium which takes these decisions.
independent NGO) for Evaluation, If the FBI and ABA ratings are positive the name is put before the Executive for approval. If Executive approves the nomination, he signs it and sends it to the Legislature for approval. In Legislature, the nomination is first put before the Senate Judiciary Committee which consists of 18 members (Senate is a legislative body, quite similar to our Upper House of Parliament). Staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee follows a due procedure some like reviewing FBI check,
investigation,
background
The Senate Judiciary Committee then holds a hearing with the Judicial Nominee, and the entire hearing proceeding is TELEVISED, After the hearing, the Senate Judiciary
Committee members vote, and if the nominee gets the majority vote, the proposal goes before the Full Senate (Full House), If the Full Senate approves by a majority vote the nomination is then forwarded again to the Executive. Finally the Executive (President) appoints the nominee as a Federal Judge. Hmmm .. does that sound transparent & elaborate ?????
4. Conclusion:
4.1 Who Appoints Judges ?
USA
Executive + Legislature
In India, the same pillar of democracy is involved in its Appointment. In USA, the other two pillars of democracy are involved in the Appointment of the judicial pillar of democracy.
Thus, the Judiciary sits in its own appointment in India whereas Judiciary does not sit in its own appointment in USA.
USA
Transparent & Elaborate
INDIA
Secret Closed Door Affair
USA
Final Confirmation Hearing with Senate (Legislature) Judiciary Committee - Televised
In India, apart from the Secretive Nominations, it is even more closely guarded a secret, as to how a selection is made from amongst the secret Judicial Nominees, Whereas in USA not only a transparent & a very elaborate selection procedure is followed, but also the final confirmation hearing held by the Senate Judiciary Committee with the prospective judicial candidate is televised nation wide.
4.4 Ease v/s. Difficulty in Appointment as well as Ease v/s. Difficulty in Removal of Judges:
USA
Entry - Difficult
Elaborate & Transparent Procedure
Exit - Difficult
Requires concurrence of Both the Houses of Legislature
Exit - Difficult
Requires concurrence of Both the Houses of Legislature
know someone in the right place; at least that is what I would like believe given
Whereas, selection (Entry) of Judges is difficult in USA, as the entire nomination & selection procedure is transparent & elaborate; Exit As far as, removal (Exit) is concerned, once appointed to the post, it is difficult in both the countries (Exit needs to pass through both the houses of Legislature).
Difficult Entry = Increases the probability of a Qualitative Appointment. Difficult Exit = Necessary for the Independence of Judiciary.
4.5 Last but not the least (India Specific): Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India, lays down as follows: There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. This provision is emphatically applicable to the Nomination Aspect of the Appointment process of Judges in India, and hence while filling up any Judicial Vacancy, nominations should be invited by open advertisements. Sunil Ahya 098200 71606 sunilahya@gmail.com Post Script: Next Article - How Article 16(1) is applicable to the process of Appointment of Judges in India?