A Parliamentary panel chaired by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Sushil Kumar Modi submitted a report suggesting senior judges disclose their assets and take rotational vacations and recommended the collegium of the Supreme Court and high courts to hire more women and other candidates belonging to marginalised communities.
A Parliamentary panel submitted a report recommending bringing a law which mandates Supreme Court and high court judges to disclose their assets annually to an authority. They also pointed out that long vacations taken by judges cause cases to pile up. The panel further said that adequate representation of various sectors of Indian society for judicial appointments would strengthen the Judiciary and make it more acceptable to the people of the country.
A report on "Judicial Processes and their reform" was presented to the two Houses of Parliament on Monday by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice which is chaired by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Sushil Kumar Modi.
The panel noted that a mechanism for the periodic filing of assets by judges must be institutionalised and made publicly available. The report said, "...the Committee recommends the government to bring about appropriate legislation to make it mandatory for judges of the higher judiciary (Supreme Court and High Courts) to furnish their property returns on an annual basis to the appropriate authority."
Further, the report stated, "It belies logic that judges don't need to disclose their assets and liabilities that when the Supreme Court has gone to the extent of holding that the public has a right to know the assets of those standing for elections as MPs or MLAs."
The parliamentary panel recommended that the judges follow a rotational method of taking vacations so that the court is not shut for vacations anymore. The panel claimed that it is due to such long vacations of the courts that the pendency of cases is piling up.
The panel further pointed out that the higher judiciary suffers from a "diversity deficit" which they claim is happening because there is no caste-based reservation when it comes to judiciary appointments in the Supreme Court and high courts.
The report said, "Though there is no provision for reservation in the judicial appointments at High Courts and Supreme Court level, the Committee feels that adequate representation of various sections of Indian society will further strengthen the trust, credibility, and acceptability of the Judiciary among the citizens."
Data on representation among appointments
The report claimed that there have been 601 high court appointments since 2018. Among them, the representation was:
General category - 457
Scheduled Classes - 18
Scheduled Tribes - 9
Other backward classes - 72
Minority communities - 32
Women - 91
The report remarked that the representation of backward communities, women and minorities in higher judiciary is inadequate and recommended that the collegiums responsible for the appointment in the courts should focus on hiring more women and people belonging to the marginalised communities.