Vociferous opposition to collegium system, backlog of cases, demand for return of National Judicial Appointments Commission, under-representation of underprivileged in higher judiciary and a dig at Justice Ranjan Gogoi were among the highlights of a debate on a bill on judges' salaries and condition of services in Rajya Sabha on Monday.
Almost all MPs who participated in the debate also raised pendency of cases, vacancy of positions, lack of infrastructure in courts, need for subject and technical expertise in courts and regional benches of Supreme Court for appeals.
Being a 'money bill', the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Condition of Service) Bill was returned by the Rajya Sabha to the Lok Sabha following a discussion and all parties supporting it.
Law Minister Kiren Rijiju did not provide a clear commitment on bringing a law on NJAC, which was struck down by the Supreme Court earlier, but said the government would proceed only after "consultations" even as he said that even people in the judiciary have aired their support.
Participating in the debate, CPI(M)'s John Brittas hit out at the collegium system of appointments of judges asking whether there is any system of appointment of judges in the world which is "completely shrouded in mystery, darkness and secrecy?" He alleged that it happens only in India and the law minister is a "mute spectator".
"Are we creating a system of patronage or give and take? Are we creating an oligarchy? I am afraid we are creating an oligarchy," he said.
Referring to the non-elevation of Justice Akil Qureshi, Brittas asked, "What was his crime? Was it because he sent one of the powerful people in this dispensation in the Sohrabuddhin Sheikh case to jail?"
Justice Gogoi, who is now a nominated MP whose recent comments that he attends the House when he feels so attracted criticism, also faced the heat as some of the MPs referred to him.
RJD's Manoj K Jha took a dig at him for choosing 'Justice for the Judge' as the title of his memoir, saying there is a lot of distance between Justice VR Krishna Iyer's book 'Judging the Judge' and that of the former Chief Justice of India.
He said Justice Krishna Iyer, whom he described as a messiah of the downtrodden, had penned a book 'Judging the Judge' and now a new book has appeared with the title 'Justice for the Judge'. "The distance between 'Judging the Judge' and 'Justice for the Judge' is not progressive but regressive. This is a matter of concern. It has to be a matter of concern," he said.
Jha said Justice Krishna Iyer belonged to a league of luminaries from across the world and he was considered the champion of underdogs. "Where have we reached now?" he said.
While Congress' Amee Yajnik asked the government whether it was sensitive in filling the vacancies, DMK's P Wilson demanded that the retirement age of high court judges should be increased from 62 years to 65 years and that of the Supreme Court judges from 65 years to 70 years.
Supporting the demand for increasing judges' retirement age up to 70 years, AAP's Sanjay Singh said there should be a cooling-off period of five years for judges to take up other assignments.
Samajwadi Party's Ramgopal Yadav said equitable representation of the backward classes and SC-STs in the higher judiciary should be ensured, a demand which found echo in other lawmakers who participated in the debate. Yadav also demanded that the government should once again bring the NJAC Bill.
Watch the latest DH Videos here: