Justice Lokur’s Concurring View

Alok Kumar
{"title":"Justice Lokur’s Concurring View","authors":"Alok Kumar","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780199485079.003.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay is a comment on the robust defence of the collegium system as espoused in Justice Madan Lokur’s opinion in the NJAC Case. The author critically analyses how Justice Lokur employs constitutional history, instances of executive interference during the decades after Independence, and accounts of ‘unsuitable’ appointments made at the behest of the executive, to come up with a defence of the collegium. Justice Lokur’s specific issues with the National Judicial Appointments Commission based on which he holds the 99th Amendment to the Constitution and the NJAC Act, 2014 unconstitutional are taken up for consideration in the essay. At the same time, this essay highlights certain principled deficiencies of the collegium which might have not been considered adequately in the NJAC Case. The essay argues that the notion that the collegium upholds judicial independence does not mean that an alternative system of appointments would be likely to disturb it.","PeriodicalId":333958,"journal":{"name":"Appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court of India","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court of India","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780199485079.003.0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay is a comment on the robust defence of the collegium system as espoused in Justice Madan Lokur’s opinion in the NJAC Case. The author critically analyses how Justice Lokur employs constitutional history, instances of executive interference during the decades after Independence, and accounts of ‘unsuitable’ appointments made at the behest of the executive, to come up with a defence of the collegium. Justice Lokur’s specific issues with the National Judicial Appointments Commission based on which he holds the 99th Amendment to the Constitution and the NJAC Act, 2014 unconstitutional are taken up for consideration in the essay. At the same time, this essay highlights certain principled deficiencies of the collegium which might have not been considered adequately in the NJAC Case. The essay argues that the notion that the collegium upholds judicial independence does not mean that an alternative system of appointments would be likely to disturb it.
Lokur法官的同意意见
这篇文章是对法官Madan Lokur在NJAC案中所支持的合议制度的有力辩护的评论。作者批判性地分析了Lokur法官是如何利用宪法历史、独立后几十年行政干预的实例,以及在行政命令下做出的“不合适”任命的描述,来为合议庭辩护的。Lokur法官与国家司法任命委员会的具体问题是基于他认为第99次宪法修正案和2014年NJAC法案违宪,这篇文章将考虑到这一点。与此同时,本文强调了合议庭在原则上的一些缺陷,这些缺陷在NJAC案中可能没有得到充分的考虑。这篇文章认为,合议庭维护司法独立的概念并不意味着另一种任命制度可能会扰乱它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信