Appointing people after retirement guarantees that judicial decision-making is not influenced by unfavorable incentives when it comes to institutional design. Remark.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Judges are appointed to various quasi-judicial bodies and government positions post-retirement such as NHRC, NGT, Rajya Sabha MP, Governor etc. These are not barred in the constitution. A report by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy pointed out that as many as 70 out of 100 judges retired from the Supreme Court have taken up assignments in the many tribunals and commissions. However, these appointments raise questions on integrity of the judges as many perceive that such appointments act as an incentive for the judges to decide cases in favour of the state. This undermines judicial independence, erodes public trust, and violates basic tenets of the constitution such as separation of power. Therefore, there is a need to adopt a right institutional design to prevent perverse incentives in judicial decision-making. Since the presence of judges can bring valuable experience and legal knowledge to various institutions, some measures can be taken to preserve judicial impartiality and independence:
Independence of judiciary forms a part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. Further, being the guardian of the Constitution, the judiciary needs to be insulated from pressures and inducements. Functioning of judiciary without any bias, favoritism or appeasement is a must for maintaining tenets of democracy in India.