Dear Sunil,
What does this have to do with RTI ? If Dr Kunal Saha is disgruntled with Indian Judges (BTW, his case was poorly drafted / handled) there are other places to circulate his views.
Dr Saha has raised the issue of selection of US Supreme Court Judges. Anyone with even half a brain knows that those judges are selected on partisan basis for life, and they give their decisions on a strictly ideological basis. In any case the US SC is purely an appellate court which hardly takes up most appeals filed, whereas the Indian SC is very often used as a court of Original Jurisdiction and record.
Lastly, simply posting a link with its accompanying text here serves no purpose, add your own views / analysis too.
Sarbajit
--- In rti_india@yahoogrou
>
> 1) Make judicial system more
> transparent<http://www.deccanhe
> 14th, 2009
>
> The issue of selection of an allegedly corrupt Chief Justice of Karnataka,
> PD Dinakaran, to the Apex Court still remains a hot subject of public
> interest. While news of Dinakaran hits the headlines almost every day, the
> Chief Justice of India (CJI), the principal architect of the Supreme Court
> Collegiums that nominated Dinakaran in the first place, has chosen to keep
> silent about whether or not Dinakaran should be impeached.
>
> This is on the ground that issues pertaining to the judges' selection
> process should not be discussed in an open public forum. But the question
> is why not? Citizens in any democratic country must have the right to know
> the background and character of the judges that would decide rights and
> wrongs of the society.
>
> Some try to argue that everything about the judges must remain behind closed
> doors as otherwise their judicial independence might be jeopardized. Such
> arguments can possibly have no logical basis.
>
> All federal judges in the USA, even for the Supreme Court, must go through a
> rigorous cross-examination process by both houses of the Congress before
> they could be affirmed for the judicial post. The cross-examination is
> shown to the public in live television.
>
> This only provides more transparency to the entire system of judges'
> selection and helps to weed out the corrupt and disingenuous persons ever
> becoming a judge.
>
> Many judges in the US nominated by the president, even those selected for
> the Supreme Court, have been rejected by the Congress after they failed to
> perform when questioned about their sordid past in live public television.
>
> Justice Clarence Thomas, a sitting member of the US Supreme Court (they have
> life-time appointment in the US federal courts), went through incredible
> public humiliation during the public cross-examination process by the
> members of the Congress before being appointed to the Supreme Court about
> allegations of sexual harassment and his past relationship with Anita Hill,
> one of his subordinates earlier in his career.
>
> But the intense public grilling of Justice Thomas did not infringe on his
> judicial independence and instead, it perhaps made him a stronger and better
> judge in the Apex Court.
>
> There can be no reason for the Indian CJI to go behind the curtain about
> questions on Justice Dinakaran. Truth is always right and the justice
> system must not shy away from bringing the truth to the knowledge of every
> citizen of the country.
>
> May be it is time that the Indian lawmakers think about moving forward with
> the time and make changes in the law for complete transparency in the
> process of selection of judges.
>
> Posted by : Dr. Kunal Saha
> Professor, HIV/AIDS Center
> Columbus, Ohio, USA
>
>
> --
> It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen -
> Aristotle
>
No comments:
Post a Comment