The Collegium System of Indian Supreme Court: Evolution, Critiques, and

the Quest for Judicial Transparency and Accountability

By: Parth Tanwar*

Since it directly affects the judiciary's independence, effectiveness, and legitimacy, the

nomination of justices to the Indian Supreme Court has been a matter of enormous

significance. The Collegium System for judicial nominations in India has grown to be a

distinctive and important system over time. A small group of senior Supreme Court justices,

led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI), participate in the Collegium System, which is a crucial

part of the selection and appointment of judges to the higher court. The evolution, criticisms,

and pursuit of judicial accountability and transparency within the Collegium System of the

Indian Supreme Court are critically analyzed in this research article.

The important decision in the 1981 First Judges' Case 1 served as the impetus for the

Collegium System. In this decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the President of India alone

had the authority to nominate judges to the higher court, with the Chief Justice of India only

serving in a consultative capacity. However, this decision received much criticism, prompting

the Second Judges' Case in 1993. The Chief Justice of India, in consultation with a collegium

of senior judges, must have the primacy in recommending judicial appointments, the

Supreme Court ruled in this judgement, overturning its earlier ruling 2. The Collegium System

was then further improved and fortified by several rulings and declarations, establishing its

function in the selection of judges.

1
* Student at O.P. Jindal Global University (Pursuing LL.B (Hons) 3rd year)
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981 Supp SCC 87
2
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India, (1993) 4 SCC 441
The Collegium System has come under fire over the years despite efforts to ensure a more

fair and open judicial nomination procedure. The lack of openness in the decision-making

process, where the justifications for accepting or rejecting a candidate's suggestion are not

made public, is one of the main issues 3. Additionally, the system has come under fire for

failing to appropriately account for the representation of different ethnicities and

backgrounds, raising worries about the underrepresentation of specific societal groups in the

higher courts. Assertions of nepotism within the Collegium System and the lack of a strong

mechanism to address complaints against judges have also come under fire.

The Collegium System has been the subject of heated arguments over judicial responsibility

and openness. The system's ability to ensure judicial accountability has come under scrutiny

because there isn't a clear and transparent process for judge selections. Reforms have been

demanded by academics and legal professionals to increase process transparency, foster

greater public trust, and address the current opacity surrounding judicial selections4.

To critically analyze the Collegium System of the Indian Supreme Court, this research study

looks at its development, evaluates the criticisms, and explores the pressing need for judicial

accountability and transparency. It aims to offer insights into how the Collegium System

might be reinforced to safeguard the values of judicial independence and public confidence in

the Indian court by considering global best practices and potential reforms.

Evolution and Genesis of the Collegium System

3
Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, (1985) 1 SCC 641
4
Dattar, Fali S., and Indira Jaising. "The Collegium System." The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution
(Oxford Handbooks), edited by Sujit Choudhry, Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 879-894.
Since its beginnings, the Collegium System, a special system for appointing judges to the

Indian Supreme Court, has gone through several stages of change. Its development is

inextricably related to important judicial decisions that aimed to strike a balance between the

values of judicial independence and executive input into appointment procedures.

The First Judges' Case decision in 1981, where the Supreme Court debated whether the Chief

Justice of India (CJI) had a significant role in the selection process or whether the President

of India had sole authority to appoint judges to the higher judiciary, is where the Collegium

System first emerged. In a majority ruling, the Court determined that the CJI's role in

appointing judges was purely advisory and that the President had the final say 5. This decision

sparked debate about the necessity to protect judicial independence as well as potential

presidential meddling in judge appointments.

The Second Judges' Case, which occurred in 1993, was thereafter a critical turning point in

the development of the Collegium System. A larger panel of nine judges reversed the First

Judges' Case ruling and reexamined the topic of judicial appointments. The Court decided

that the CJI should oversee making recommendations for judicial appointments in

conjunction with a collegium of senior judges. The President, who would make the final

appointment, would be bound by the collegium's recommendations. The Second Judges' Case

ruling by the Court sought to guarantee a more open and unbiased procedure while protecting

the judiciary from improper executive influence6.

Later rulings, most notably the Third Judges' Case in 1998, furthered the Collegium System's

refinement. This decision emphasized that the CJI's view must be formulated in collaboration

5
Supra note 1.
6
Supra note 2.
with a collegium made up of the four most senior Supreme Court judges, which clarified the

procedure for recommending judges for the higher judiciary 7. With this choice, the

collegium's institutional character was strengthened and its capacity for choosing qualified

individuals for judicial appointments was improved.

With the Fourth Judges' Case in 20158, which saw the Supreme Court restate its stance on the

collegium's supremacy in judge selections, the Collegium System continued to develop. The

Court did emphasize that any candidate's rejection should be documented in writing and

emphasized the necessity for openness and cooperation during the hiring process.

The judiciary has worked to improve the Collegium System's operation and address issues

with opacity and nepotism through these rulings. The growth of the Collegium System

demonstrates the judiciary's dedication to upholding its independence and improving the

selection procedure for justices to sit on the highest court in the land.

Functioning of the Collegium System

A small number of senior judges consult one another for the Collegium System, which

oversees judicial appointments to the Indian Supreme Court, to function. The Collegium

System operates through a set of considerations and actions that are intended to suggest

qualified applicants for judicial positions in the highest court in the land.

7
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India, (1993) 4 SCC 441
8
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India, (2016) 5 SCC 1
The CJI is essential to the way the Collegium System operates. The CJI oversees the

collegium and starts the judicial recruitment process in his capacity as the head of the

judiciary9. The final decision-making procedure gives the CJI's judgement a lot of weight.

The CJI and four of the Supreme Court's most senior judges make up the Collegium in most

cases. The senior-most judge serves as the collegium's head when the CJI is absent or

ineligible. The members of the collegium hold discussions to decide on Supreme Court

nominees for appointment and transfer.

The Collegium System's operation entails a thorough evaluation of prospective judicial

appointment candidates. The collegium considers several things, such as legal knowledge,

experience, integrity, and appropriateness for the position. Additionally, it considers the idea

of regional representation to guarantee a range of viewpoints on the bench.

The Collegium System may consult Chief Justices and other High Court justices in addition

to taking candidates' credentials and merit into account. These data offer insightful

information on the applicants' performance and reputation in the relevant jurisdictions.

The names of the nominees are recommended to the Indian President once the collegium

members have come to an agreement on them. The warrant of appointment to the Supreme

Court is issued by the President in accordance with the collegium's recommendations.

9
Supra note 7.
The Collegium System is also engaged in the movement of judges between the High Courts

and the Supreme Court in addition to appointments. The needs of the administration of justice

and the interests of the judiciary are taken into consideration when considering transfers.

Advantages of the Collegium System

The Collegium System offers several benefits that support the independence and

effectiveness of the court. It enables a small group of senior judges to play a significant

influence in judicial nominations to the Indian Supreme Court. These benefits have been

acknowledged by a range of interested parties and legal professionals, making the Collegium

System a crucial component of the Indian judicial system.

The Collegium System's potential to protect judicial independence is one of its main

features. The approach lessens the possibility of political or executive intervention in judicial

selections by assigning the appointment process to a collegium of senior judges 10. This makes

sure that judges are chosen based on their qualifications, legal knowledge, and integrity rather

than other factors.

The Collegium System enables a thorough evaluation of candidates' legal knowledge and

insight. The collegium can efficiently assess the credentials and fitness of applicants for

appointment to the Supreme Court because the decision-making process involves dialogue

among experienced justices. This makes sure that only the most qualified and capable people

hold the top-court positions.

10
Ibid
A consultative and collaborative approach to decision-making characterizes the Collegium

System's operation. Informed and well-rounded decisions on judicial nominations can be

made thanks to the collegium members' joint deliberations, which allow for the consideration

of many viewpoints11. Collegiality makes ensuring that the process is not exclusively based

on the opinions of one person, improving the system's fairness.

The Collegium System offers protection from outside interference by giving the collegium

control over judicial selections. By guaranteeing that judges can make decisions freely and

without fear of penalties or excessive pressure from outside parties, this contributes to the

preservation of the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

Through frequent collegium consultations, the collegium system speeds up the judicial

appointment process. This effectiveness is especially important for swiftly filling open

positions and ensuring the Supreme Court and other courts operate without interruption.

Criticisms and Challenges of the Collegium System

Although the Collegium System of appointing judges to the Indian Supreme Court has merits,

it has also come under heavy scrutiny and difficulties. These criticisms have spurred

discussions on the necessity of accountability, transparency, and system improvements. The

Collegium System is subject to the following major critiques and difficulties:

11
Supra note 8.
The lack of transparency in the Collegium System's decision-making process is one of its

main critiques. The process mostly takes place behind closed doors, and the reasons for

approving or rejecting a candidate's suggestion are never made public 12. The justification for

certain nominations is still a secret, which has raised questions about nepotism and

favoritism.

There is no effective way to hold judges responsible for their recommendations under the

Collegium System. The Collegium System does not have checks and balances to ensure that

the collegium's judgements are carefully considered, in contrast to other judicial appointment

systems. The necessity for external scrutiny to guarantee that appointments are chosen based

on objective and merit-based criteria is called into doubt by this lack of accountability.

Concerns regarding the decision-making process' transparency have also been raised because

of the collegium's discussions being held behind closed doors. The legality of the

nominations, according to critics, is compromised by this lack of openness, which also

damages public confidence in the judiciary.

The Collegium System is also criticized for its lack of diversity and regional representation

on the bench. Some contend that the system might not take candidates from underrepresented

areas or marginalized people into sufficient consideration, resulting in a lack of diversity in

the judiciary.

12
Supra note 4.
 The consultative procedure used by the collegium has come under fire for delaying judicial

appointments. The length of time required for reaching agreements and consultations among

collegium members has occasionally led to extended vacancies in the higher courts, which

has a negative impact on the prompt administration of justice13.

The Collegium System lacks a reliable procedure for handling grievances against judges who

have been recommended for appointments14. This has sparked worries that any wrongdoing

or unethical behavior may go unchecked and undermine the judiciary's reputation.

Transparency and Accountability Concerns

Due to its lack of openness and accountability, the Collegium System of appointing judges to

the Indian Supreme Court has come under intense scrutiny and criticism. Even though the

system strives to protect judicial independence, questions have been raised about how opaque

its decision-making process is and how to hold judges accountable for their recommendations

in the absence of such measures.

The absence of public disclosure of the justifications for accepting or rejecting a candidate's

suggestion is one of the main issues. The Collegium System functions behind closed doors,

and the reasons for certain appointments are kept secret 15. The public is not aware of the

variables influencing judicial selections, which raises concerns about the impartiality and

objectivity of the process.

13
Shanti Bhushan v. Supreme Court of India, (2018) 8 SCC 396
14
Ibid.
15
https://www.epw.in/journal/2021/22/insight/supreme-court-collegium-and-transparency.html
Strong procedures to hold judges responsible for their recommendations are missing from the

Collegium System. The Collegium System does not have a formalized method for reviewing

the collegium's judgements, in contrast to other systems of judicial appointments that do 16.

Concerns over potential favoritism or nepotism in hiring decisions have been raised because

of this lack of accountability.

The influence of interpersonal ties or affiliations on the collegium's judgements has been

criticized. The public's confidence in the judiciary is weakened by the idea that some

nominations may be influenced by nepotism in the absence of transparency in the decision-

making process17.

The Collegium System lacks an efficient procedure for handling grievances against judges

who have been suggested for appointments. Even while judicial misconduct or unethical

behavior may be uncommon, the lack of a strong structure for handling complaints has led to

worries about possible misconduct going unreported.

The Collegium System has been criticized for its lack of transparency over the years. To

increase public trust and legitimacy, a few legal professionals and stakeholders have

emphasized the importance of disclosing the grounds behind nominations and rejections.

To guarantee that the Collegium System retains its independence and upholds the ideals of

openness, justice, and public confidence in the judicial nomination process, it is crucial to

address these transparency and accountability challenges.

16
Supra note 13.
17
Ibid
Judicial Independence vs. Accountability

The disputes over the Collegium System of judicial appointments to the Indian Supreme

Court center on the conflict between judicial independence and accountability. The system,

which gives a small group of senior judges a great deal of discretion in choosing justices,

tries to protect judicial independence from presidential meddling. Concerns about the dearth

of efficient accountability measures, however, have prompted talks about finding the ideal

balance between judicial independence and accountability.

The Collegium System shields the appointment procedure from direct governmental

influence to maintain judicial independence 18. By giving the collegium control over judicial

nominations, the system hopes to guarantee that judges are chosen solely based on their

qualifications and competence, unaffected by political or other forces. The maintenance of

the rule of law and the ability of judges to make impartial decisions depend on judicial

independence.

While preserving public trust and confidence in the court requires judicial independence,

accountability is just as important. The Collegium System, according to critics, lacks

effective accountability procedures to carefully examine the collegium's choices 19. There are

worries that possible misbehavior would go unreported due to the lack of openness in the

decision-making process and the ineffectiveness of the complaint redressal procedure.

Finding the ideal balance between judicial independence and accountability is the challenge.

While accountability is critical to make sure that the court is transparent and responsive to the
18
Supra note 7.
19
Supra note 13.
public it serves, judicial independence is also necessary for a strong and impartial judiciary 20.

To increase public trust in the judicial system, it is important to strike a balance between

preserving judicial independence and establishing checks and balances.

The delicate balance between judicial independence and accountability is best demonstrated

by the way the Collegium System operates in the Indian Supreme Court. Although the

autonomy of the system tries to protect judicial independence, questions have been raised

regarding how effective it is due to a lack of transparency and accountability procedures.

Maintaining the public's trust in the court while protecting its independence and integrity

calls for constant examination and reforms to strike the correct balance between judicial

independence and accountability.

Conclusion

The Collegium System of judicial appointments to the Indian Supreme Court has undergone

changes, received criticisms, and has been the focus of ongoing efforts to improve judicial

accountability and transparency. The Collegium System has developed to become the main

method for choosing judges for the nation's highest court. It was first used in the First Judges'

Case and then refined in the Second, Third, and Fourth Judges' Cases. Although the system

was designed to protect judicial independence from administrative intervention, it has over

the years come under heavy fire and encountered many difficulties.

The Collegium System has drawn criticism for its perceived nepotism, lack of accountability,

and lack of openness. Concerns about the impartiality and objectivity of the process have

20
K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1
been raised considering the collegium's closed-door deliberations and the lack of public

disclosure for approving or rejecting candidate proposals. Additionally, the system's capacity

to address possible misconduct or unethical behavior has been questioned due to the absence

of strong complaint redressal systems and effective accountability mechanisms.

Reforms to the Collegium System have been demanded in the sake of judicial accountability

and transparency. Increased transparency in the decision-making process, rational arguments

for appointments, and procedures to check the collegium's judgements have all been stressed

by academics, legal professionals, and others. It has become increasingly difficult to strike

the correct balance between judicial independence and accountability, needing continual

examination and systemic changes.

Even with its flaws, the Collegium System has helped to advance judicial independence,

ensure the appointment of qualified judges, and increase diversity on the bench. The system's

quick nomination process has also made it easier to replace Supreme Court vacancies

promptly, aiding in the effective administration of justice.

In the pursuit for judicial accountability and transparency, the Collegium System of the

Indian Supreme Court continues to be a topic of discussion and reform. Even while it has

been crucial in preserving judicial independence, the system's openness and accountability

issues must be resolved if the public is to continue having faith in the judiciary. To maintain

the judiciary's integrity and guarantee its efficacy in serving the country, continual attempts to

achieve a balance between judicial autonomy and public accountability will be essential.