Daily Current Affairs

Collegium system& related issues (GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)

Context:

• Amid Union law minister’s recent remarks on the Supreme Court Collegium, the central government has asked the Supreme Court to reconsider 19 out of the 21 names recommended for appointment as High Court judges.
• The Centre expressed “strong reservations” about these pending recommendations made by the apex court collegium and sent back the files.
• The Supreme Court said that the government cannot just hold back recommendations without notifying any concerns.

 

What is the collegium system?

• A Supreme Court Collegium is a five-member judges’ body that is headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and consists of four other seniormost judges of the top court at the time.
• A High Court Collegium consists of a Chief Justice and two seniormost judges of that court.
• An HC Collegium sends the recommendation to the collegium of the apex court on judicial appointments.
• The appointments made through the collegium system can be in the form of elevation of High Court judges to the top court, or direct appointments of senior lawyers as Supreme Court judges, as per Business Standard.
• The collegium system is not governed by any specific law enacted by the Parliament.

 

Constitutional provisions:

• Articles 124(2) and 217 of the Constitution are related to the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• According to Article 124(2), “Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-five years. Provided that in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of India shall always be consulted.”
• Article 217 states: “Every Judge of a High Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State, and, in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of the High Court.”

 

Union government’s role:

• Once cleared by the CJI and SC Collegium, the names of judges for the High Court’s reach the central government. The Centre has a limited role in the appointment of judges to High Courts or the apex court.
• The government can get a probe conducted by the Intelligence Bureau (IB) on whether a particular lawyer should be elevated. It can also seek clarification or express objections, however, if the collegium reiterates those recommendations, they have to be accepted.
• The collegium system has been criticised by some over its lack of transparency.

 

What was NJAC Act and why was it repealed?

• In 2014, the central government brought the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Bill. The Constitution (99th Amendment) Bill, 2014 and the NJAC Bill were cleared by both houses of the Parliament the same year.They came into effect on 13 April 2015.
• The NJAC Act sought to change the collegium system and extend the role of the executive in appointments to the higher judiciary.
• The commission was to comprise the Chief Justice of India (Chairperson, ex-officio), two other senior SC judges, Union minister of law and justice, ex-officio and two other eminent persons, to be appointed by the CJI, Prime Minister, and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
• However, some lawyer associations and groups filed petitions in the Supreme Court challenging the Act.
• In October 2015, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC Act 2014 as “unconstitutional and void”. In a 4:1 majority verdict, the bench held the collegium system would make the appointments of judges, and the CJI would have “the last word”.
• In December 2021 the law minister had claimed that there is growing support for the reintroduction of the NJAC Bill.

 

How do other democracies elect their judiciary?

USA:

• In the United States of America, Supreme Court justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
• The federal judiciary, the Judicial Conference of the United States, and the Administrative Office of the US Courts play no role in the nomination and confirmation process.

 

UK:

• In the United Kingdom, a selection commission is convened by the Lord Chancellor for the appointments to the judiciary. The Lord Chancellor heads the ministry of justice as the Secretary of State for Justice.
• If the Lord Chancellor is satisfied with the recommendation, then the name is forwarded to the Prime Minister who, in turn, sends it to the King who makes the formal appointment.

 

Canada:

• Canada’s Supreme Court has nine judges, including the Chief Justice of Canada.
• Each judge is appointed by the Governor in Council and must have been “either a judge of a superior court or a member of at least ten years’ standing of the bar of a province or territory”.

 

France:

• In France’s Court of Cassation, the highest court in its judicial system, the judges are selected by the President of the Republic on a recommendation of the Higher Council of the Judiciary.

 

Norway:

• In Norway, the King-in-council appoints the judges. An advisory appointment board suggests the government on the issue of the selection of judges. This appointment board examines the qualifications of applicants.
• The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court gives recommendations to the Minister of Justice, while the King-in-council takes the final decision.

Significant Decline in the Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR)

(GS Paper 3, Economy)

Why in news?

• In a new milestone, there has been significant Decline in the Maternal Mortality Ratio from 130 in 2014-16 to 97 per lakh live births in 2018-20.

Details:

• As per the Special Bulletin on MMR released by the Registrar General of India (RGI), the Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR) of India has improved further by a spectacular 6 points and now stands at 97/ lakh live births.
• The Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR) is defined as the number of maternal deaths during a given time period per 100,000 live births.

National Health Policy (NHP) target:

• As per the statistics derived from Sample Registration System (SRS), the country has witnessed a progressive reduction in MMR from 130 in 2014-2016, 122 in 2015-17, 113 in 2016-18, 103 in 2017-19 and to 97 in 2018-20 as depicted below: 

 

What is the collegium system?

• Upon achieving this, India has accomplished the National Health Policy (NHP) target for MMR of less than 100/lakh live births and is on the right track to achieve the SDG target of MMR less than 70/ lakh live births by 2030.
• The outstanding progress made in terms of the number of states which have achieved Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target, the number has now risen from six to eight leading with Kerala (19), followed by Maharashtra (33), then Telangana (43) and Andhra Pradesh (45), subsequently Tamil Nadu (54), Jharkhand (56), Gujarat (57) and lastly Karnataka (69).

 

Government interventions:

• Since 2014, under the National Health Mission (NHM), India has made a concerted effort to provide accessible quality maternal and newborn health services and minimize preventable maternal deaths.
• The National Health Mission has made significant investments to ensure provision of healthcare services, particularly for effective implementation of the maternal health programs to accomplish the specified MMR targets.
• Government schemes such as “Janani Shishu Suraksha Karyakram” and “Janani Suraksha Yojana” have been modified and upgraded to more assured and respectful service delivery initiatives like Surakshit Matritva Aashwasan’ (SUMAN).
• Pradhan Mantri Surakshit Matritva Abhiyan (PMSMA) is particularly lauded for its focus on identifying high-risk pregnancies and facilitating their appropriate management. This had a significant impact on mitigating preventable mortality.
• LaQshya and Midwifery initiatives concentrate on promoting quality care in a respectful and dignified manner ensuring choice of birthing to all pregnant women.

 

Way Forward:

• India’s outstanding efforts in successfully lowering the MMR ratio provides an optimistic outlook on attaining SDG target of MMR less than 70 much before the stipulated time of 2030 and becoming known as a nation that provides respectful maternal care.

 

India to receive over record $100 bn in remittances in 2022: World Bank

(GS Paper 3, Economy)

Why in news?

• In its latest ‘Migration and Development Brief’, World Bank said remittance flows to India will rise 12 per cent, putting its inflows ahead of China, Mexico and the Philippines.
• In 2022, for the first time a single country, India, is on track to receive more than USD 100 billion in yearly remittances.

Key Highlights:

• The remittances to South Asia grew an estimated 3.5 per cent to USD 163 billion in 2022. However, there is a large disparity across countries, from India's projected 12 per cent gain to Nepal's 4 per cent increase, to an aggregate decline of 10 per cent for the region's remaining countries.
• Remittances to India were enhanced by wage hikes and a strong labour market in the United States and other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.
• In the Gulf Cooperation Council destination countries, governments ensured low inflation through direct support measures that protected migrants' ability to remit. Sending USD 200 to the region cost 4.1 per cent on average in the second quarter of 2022, down from 4.3 per cent a year ago.

LMICs:

• Remittances to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) withstood global headwinds in 2022, growing an estimated 5 per cent to USD 626 billion. This is sharply lower than the 10.2 per cent increase in 2021.
• Remittances are a vital source of household income for LMICs. They alleviate poverty, improve nutritional outcomes, and are associated with increased birth weight and higher school enrollment rates for children in disadvantaged households.
• According to World Bank, studies show that remittances help recipient households to build resilience, for example through financing better housing and to cope with the losses in the aftermath of disasters.

Factors shaping remittance flow:

• Remittance flows to developing regions were shaped by several factors in 2022. A reopening of host economies as the COVID-19 pandemic receded supported migrants' employment and their ability to continue helping their families back home.
• The World Bank brief said rising prices on the other hand, adversely affected migrants' real incomes. Also influencing the value of remittances is the appreciation of the ruble, which translated into higher value, in U.S. dollar terms, of outward remittances from Russia to Central Asia.

 

Impact of climate change:

• In a special feature on climate-driven migration, it notes that rising pressures from climate change will both drive increases in migration within countries and impair livelihoods. The poorest are likely to be most affected as they often lack the resources necessary to adapt or move.
• Studies show that migration can play a role in coping with climate impacts, for example, by providing an escape from disasters and also through remittances and other forms of support to affected households.
• The changes in the international legal norms and institutional frameworks for migration may be required to cope with the challenge of climate-related migration, particularly in the context of cross-border mobility, as is the case for small island nations.

Towards a robust triumvirate

(GS Paper 2, Judiciary)

Context:

• A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is examining a bunch of petitions recommending reforms in the process of appointment of members of the Election Commission. It is hoped that the Bench will also examine electoral reforms suggested to governments by successive Election Commissions over the last two decades or so. 

Background:

• A list of over 20 reform proposals was compiled in 2004. More proposals were added to the list over time and are pending with government.
• These range from strengthening the Commission’s inherent structure to handling the misuse of muscle and money power during elections, which violate the Model Code of Conduct.

 

The matter of appointments:

• The first, under consideration, is whether Election Commissioners should be selected by the executive or by a collegium. The idea of a collegium is not new.

 

Dinesh Goswami Committee:

• The Dinesh Goswami Committee in 1990 suggested that the Chief Election Commissioner be appointed by the President (read: executive) in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition. It said this process should have statutory backing.
• Importantly, it applied the same criteria to the appointments of Election Commissioners, along with consultation with the Chief Election Commissioner.

 

National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution:

• The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, under Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, said that the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners should be appointed on the recommendation of a body comprising the Prime Minister, the Leaders of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

 

255th Report of the Law Commission:

• The 255th Report of the Law Commission, chaired by Justice A.P. Shah, said the appointment of all the Election Commissioners should be made by the President in consultation with a three-member collegium consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition of the Lok Sabha (or the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha), and the Chief Justice of India.
• It also suggested measures to safeguard Election Commissioners from arbitrary removal, in a manner similar to what is accorded to the Chief Election Commissioner, who can only be removed by impeachment, which is by no means easy.
• None of these recommendations gained traction in the governments to whom they were submitted.

Security of Tenure:

• The second issue is to afford the same security from arbitrary removal to Election Commissioners that the Constitution affords to the Chief Election Commissioner.
• The Supreme Court lost an opportunity for reform in its judgment in the Seshan case.
• It conferred equal powers on the Election Commissioners as those enjoyed by the Chief Election Commissioner (referring to the Chief Election Commissioner as primus inter pares, or first among equals) and even offered majority power, whereby any two can overrule even the Chief Election Commissioner.
• Yet, it did not afford the Election Commissioners the same constitutional protection (of removal by impeachment) as is accorded to the Chief Election Commissioner. It is hoped that the present Bench will examine this.

Recommendations:

• In the absence of full constitutional security, an Election Commissioner could feel they must keep on the right side of the Chief Election Commissioner. They might also feel they should remain within the ambit favoured by the government.
• With such misgivings, an Election Commissioner can never be sure whether they will automatically be elevated to the top post because nowhere has elevation been statutorily decreed.
• While the Chief Election Commissioner should be appointed by a collegium, this must apply equally to the Election Commissioners. The collegium should be wide based.
• Strengthened now by a broad-based selection by the top constitutional luminaries of the country, the Election Commission must now equally be protected from arbitrary removal by a constitutional amendment that would ensure a removal process that currently applies only to the Chief Election Commissioner. Without this, the Election Commission of India will not be a robust triumvirate.