Beyond Benchmarks: Unveiling The Constitutional Nuances Of The 99th Amendment And NJAC
- IJLLR Journal
- 7 minutes ago
- 1 min read
Aryan Vats, B.A.LL.B. (Hons), National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi
ABSTRACT
In democracies, the process of appointing judges is always a struggle between the need for judicial independence and the necessity of democratic accountability. India's move to address this issue through the 99th Constitutional Amendment and the creation of the National Judicial Appointments Commission mark an important constitutional turning point. The Supreme Court 2015 decision in 2015 by 4:1 majority to reject the NJAC is considered the basic structure doctrine and thus judicial autonomy was preserved but the court left very few questions unanswered. After ten years of the debate has become louder instead of being resolved and India is facing the same problems. This article traces the evolution of India and its judicial appointment mechanisms from executive primacy through the collegium system to the collapse of the NJAC. By contrasting Justice Khehar's majority opinion with Justice Chelameswar's insightful dissent, the article attempts to uncover the core constitutional issues that lie in the tension between:
transparency and independence
accountability and autonomy
federal balance
Examining developments through 2025 including political consensus for reform and appointment crisis the article demonstrates that the collegium system's opacity and structural limitations continue to undermine judicial legitimacy. Through comparative analysis and examination of international models the article argues that alternative mechanisms can reconcile independence with accountability, offering constitutional pathways for reform that remain constitutionally viable and institutionally necessary.
Keywords: Judicial Appointments, Basic Structure Doctrine, Judicial Independence, Collegium System, National Judicial Appointments Commission
