Why Chief Justices Need Longer Tenures?

Source: The post the Chief Justices Need Longer Tenures has been created, based on the article “Chief Justices need longer tenures” published in “The Hindu” on 12^th December 2024.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS 2- Polity and governance

Context: The article discusses the persistent issue of short tenures for Chief Justices in Indian High Courts, a problem that undermines the institutional effectiveness and operational efficiency of the judiciary. Why Chief Justices Need Longer Tenures? It highlights recent examples, explores the critical role of a Chief Justice, and provides a historical comparison to emphasize the need for longer tenures. 

Why are short tenures of Chief Justices a concern?

Short tenures limit the ability of Chief Justices to effectively manage their responsibilities. They often retire before fully understanding the institution they lead, which impacts the overall efficiency and innovation within the judiciary.

Why is a Chief Justice’s role critical?

The Chief Justice oversees:

1. Administrative and financial health of the High Court.
2. Recommendations for judgeship appointments.
3. Formation of various committees.
4. Staff welfare and disciplinary actions.
5. Representation of the judiciary at seminars, symposia, and bar associations.
6. Legal education and engagement with advocate associations.
7. Judicial responsibilities as the State’s top authority.

Are the challenges similar across all High Courts?

1. No, the challenges vary significantly across High Courts depending on their location and specific requirements.
2. Understanding these unique needs demands time, which short tenures do not allow.

What have experts and judges said about this issue?

1. Justice L. Nageswara Rao of the Supreme Court stated that judges elevated to the apex court need a minimum of 7-8 years, if not 10, to settle into their roles.
2. Chief Justices with brief tenures have echoed similar concerns, lamenting their inability to initiate reforms or improvements due to limited time.

Was this always the case?

No, during British rule, Chief Justices typically had longer tenures. For instance:

1. Between 1862 and 1947, the Madras High Court had only 11 Chief Justices, averaging 8 years per tenure.
2. In contrast, from 1947 to 2012, the Court had 24 Chief Justices in 65 years, averaging only 75 years. Excluding long-serving Chief Justices P.V. Rajamannar (13 years) and Veeraswami K. (7 years), the average drops to just over 2 years.

Why does this issue need urgent attention?

Short tenures leave little room for innovation, reform, and systemic improvement. The increasing complexity of a Chief Justice’s duties makes prolonged tenures essential for meaningful contributions.

What can be done to address this problem?

1. The solution requires joint deliberation among stakeholders, including the Bar, to design measures ensuring longer and more effective tenures for Chief Justices.
2. This needs to be prioritized before it deeply impacts the judiciary’s institutional health.