New Delhi, April 25 – After serving for 19 years in the higher judiciary, of which nine months were spent as the CJI, Justice Palanisamy Sathasivam feels the Centre and the state governments are to be equally blamed if they felt that corrupt and politically affiliated persons are making their way into the higher judiciary.
In an interview to Mail Today on Thursday, Sathasivam, 65, said the Centre and states were not using the Intelligence Bureau effectively when their opinion is sought on the antecedents of a candidate who is going to be chosen as a judge.
“The Intelligence Bureau has a role to play. They (IB officers) must enquire properly and say that a particular candidate is not suitable. Normally it is not happening when the Centre and state is asked about the antecedents of a particular person.
If effectively done, it can go a long way in curbing persons with corrupt mindset and those politically affilated assuming charge as judges,” Sathasivam, who officially retires on Saturday, said.
Sathasivam will sign out on Friday with a judgment on the validity of Tamil Nadu government’s seemingly politically motivated and controversial plan to release three convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.
The outgoing CJI, who presided over a Supreme Court which kept the Centre constantly on tenterhooks in cases like the 2G scam, Coal scam and several PILs, admitted that the last six months had been tumultuous for him following the allegations of sexual harassment against two recently retired SC judges. But he refused to comment on them, saying “the matters are sub-judice”.
On the collegium system of appointing judges, Sathasivam said it was perfectly fine but a wider consultation was required to improve the quality of judges and to infuse transparency. “At the high court level, a chief justice being an outsider should consult more seniors and senior members of the bar.
In the Supreme Court, the discussions should not be confined to three top most judges and should be also with other judges and senior members of the bar,” he said. Asked about judicial activism, he found nothing wrong in the judiciary’s intervention whenever the executive fails to perform its task.
He also felt that the weapon of public interest litigations was prone to be misused and many ‘private interest litigations’ were being filed in the guise of PILs. Regarding senior designated lawyers dominating the SC, he said their experience and knowledge shall be respected but there was no need to provide special treatment.
“I don’t completely approve of seniors managing early hearing of cases or urgent listing. Seniors themselves has to prepare a code of conduct. The court can do precious little in this,” he said.
-INDIA TODAY
