Impeachment move doesn’t fetter CJI, say experts

Impeachment move doesn’t fetter CJI, say experts

What has happened?

Former Chief Justices of India and eminent jurists said on Friday that there was no need for Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra to withdraw from work merely because a group of Opposition MPs had submitted a notice for his impeachment to the Rajya Sabha Chairman.

No provision in the constitution

Both the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968 are silent on whether a judge facing impeachment motion should excuse himself from judicial and administrative work till he is cleared of the charges against him

Usual work for CJI

Until the Rajya Sabha Chairman makes up his mind to admit the motion and refer it to an Inquiry Committee under the 1968 Act, things will be as usual for the CJI

Review of decision

The jurists are, however, divided on whether a decision by the Rajya Sabha Chairman to refuse the impeachment motion would be judicially reviewable

Whether a decision by the Rajya Sabha Chairman to refuse the impeachment motion would be judicially reviewable?

• View 1:  Impeachment was a “legislative process where a decision thereon is amenable to judicial scrutiny”, and the Chairman’s decision was not protected by parliamentary privilege
• View 2: Chairman’s decision to refuse or admit the motion would be hit by parliamentary privilege.

Can’t sit over the motion

He [Chairman] is a constitutional authority. This motion is made by over 60 MPs. The Chairman cannot refuse the motion on flimsy grounds. He cannot delay and let uncertainty continue. He has to decide within a reasonable time

The process needs to be updated

For 60 years, it has not worked wherever it was needed. It requires serious deliberation on what alternative measures can be employed to bring an end to the matter