“The system is opaque. There is no transparency, no procedure. What are the parameters for selection? No one knows what the collegium is looking for in candidates.”

This is what A.P.Shah, chief justice of Delhi high court, said last Thursday referring to the functioning of supreme court's collegium that appoints judges to the apex court.

He went on to add: “Would you not expect a judge to have a humanitarian view? Is he competent? If it is an elevation to the supreme court, are his judgments over the years taken into account? For service judges, there is a system. Their judgments are examined and they are graded. There is no such procedure for elevation to supreme court.”

This was his parting comments on the last day in office. Shah was obviously hurt at being bypassed for appointment as the apex court judge and honestly admitted that. But his comments can not be measured by that yardstick alone. He was no ordianry judge, writing on his blog. He was one of the finest and wrote two land mark judgements in recent times--decriminalisation of homosexuality and bringing the office of chief justice of india within the purveiw of RTI.

Shah's view only strengthens the doubt about the collegium system. Remember how the collegium not only failed to take into account the land-grabbing charge against chief justice of Karnataka high court P.D. Dinakaran while recommending his elevation to the apex court, it also refused to act when the revelations sparked a countrywide uproar.  And finally, when it became too hot to handle, the collegium wrote to the government to take appropriate action, thereby, abdicating its responsibility.

By no means that was an isolated case. Eyebrows were raised on earlier occasions too. The government and various political parties have, for several years, been talking about replacing it with a more borad-based National Judicial Commission.

Now that one of the finest judges has pointed out the flaws in the existing system shouldn't the appointment of apex court judges be made more transparent?