In light of recent developments, the Collegium system and the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014 have once again come under scrutiny. Do you think that a NJAC-like body can make judicial appointments more transparent, broad-based, and accountable? Justify your answer.

Recently, Delhi HC Judge Yashwant Verma have been alleged to own burnt coal in his house backyard. Miss, even VP of India called for unleased accountability and transparency in Indian judiciary. Functions of NJAC: Appointment, Selection of Judges of SC and HC, Transfer of Judges, Removal inquiries. Composition of NJAC: CJI, 2 senior most SC Judges, Chief Law minister, 2 eminent persons appointed by Central Government. Constructive role of NJAC: a System of checks and balance. b Transparency in selection of judges. c In-demo calls counter fellow such system. d Check on favoritism nepotism. e Pendency of vacancies can be addressed (29.7% vacancy in HC). f Inclusivity of women in judiciary can be ensured (currently 14% in supreme court and 11% in HCs).

Limitations of NJAC like mechanism: i Independence of Judiciary can be compromised (44 Judges case: independent of judiciary = Basic structure of constitution). ii Delayed selection because of increased conflict and lack of consensus. iii Trust deficit among public due to involvement of executive. Thus, alone NJAC will not suffice and should be clubbed with use of technology in courts (e-courts), SUPACE, better case management through AI, inclusive infrastructure (female toilets), and transparency in CJI office (under RTI act CPOL %s Subhas Kariyap laws).