Opaque judge selection process lets people who call communities 'ants' escape accountability, warns sitting SC judge

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan says the collegium system's lack of transparency lets people who call communities 'ants' become judges without ever being held accountable, and has called for public debate and published reasons behind judicial appointments.

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has openly questioned the collegium system used to appoint judges in India, saying the lack of transparency in judicial appointments allows people who describe entire communities as "ants" to end up on the bench, and later walk away without ever being held accountable. He called such remarks a direct violation of the spirit of the Constitution.

He argued that if the appointment process were more transparent, and if there were public discussion around candidates before they were elevated, entry of such individuals into the judiciary could have been stopped at the outset.

Why avoid public debate on who becomes a judge?
Justice Bhuyan made the remarks at an event organised by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy at the India International Centre in New Delhi, where he released a report titled "The Judicial Transparency Index." He asked the audience a pointed question: what exactly is the harm in holding a public discussion about the people being made judges?

He said that if such appointments are to be prevented, open discussion about candidates has to happen beforehand. "People have the right to know who is being made a judge in this country," he said. His argument was that greater transparency would only strengthen public trust in the judiciary, so putting information about candidates before the public carries no downside, only benefits.

Questions over the collegium's secrecy
Justice Bhuyan also commented on how the collegium actually functions. He said the entire process behind judicial appointments and transfers remains highly confidential. In many cases, it is not even disclosed why a particular name was cleared, or why a particular recommendation was set aside.

He specifically referred to three collegium meetings held in 2025, saying no clear reason was made public for the appointment or transfer decisions taken in them, even though the collegium had, in several earlier cases, published detailed reasons behind its decisions. In other words, transparency around the collegium's decisions has actually gone down in recent times, not up.

Who really loses when reasons aren't given?
"By not giving reasons, the institution actually harms the many judges who are genuinely excellent and who have done very good work," Justice Bhuyan said. His point was that when the reasoning behind a capable judge's transfer or promotion isn't made public, the judge's competence itself can wrongly come under a cloud.

He also warned of a second, opposite risk. He argued that this same habit of withholding reasons creates room for people to enter the judiciary who later go on to call groups of people "ants" or make other remarks that are entirely unconstitutional and run against the core values of the Constitution. According to him, preventing such entries requires at least some discussion around appointments and some concrete reasons being made public.

A reference to a High Court judge's remark
Justice Bhuyan said that a High Court judge had made a similar remark recently, though he did not name anyone while speaking. Notably, a former judge of the Allahabad High Court had triggered a major controversy in 2024 with comments made at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event, after which opposition leaders demanded action against him over what they called "hate speech."

In that remark, the judge had claimed that Indian culture teaches people from childhood not to harm even the smallest living creatures, not even ants, and that this teaching makes people tolerant and compassionate, allowing them to feel the pain of others' suffering. He had further claimed that, by contrast, children in certain other cultures are shown animals being killed from a young age, making it difficult to expect tolerance and compassion from them. That remark became the root of the controversy.

Questions over the collegium's recent recommendations too
Justice Bhuyan also pointed out that the Supreme Court collegium's last three statements did not give any reason for recommending judges' promotions either. He said some people might argue those recommendations followed a similar template, or were almost "copy-pasted," but at least some reasons had been offered to justify those suggestions at the time. In other words, the current situation has slipped a step further back, to a point where even those bare-minimum reasons are no longer being given.

CJI Surya Kant's "cockroach" remark had also sparked outrage
This is not the first time a remark from someone holding a top judicial post has caused controversy. A few months ago, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant sparked controversy by calling certain people "cockroaches." That remark led to an online movement called the "Cockroach Janta Party," which went on to lead protests over the NEET paper leak issue.

Commenting on criticism of the collegium system, CJI Surya Kant had earlier said that when the collegium recommends names for appointment to the Supreme Court, several factors are taken into account, including the candidate's body of work, their experience and tenure as a judge, the posts they have previously held, and even their overall professional life.

What this means for you
• For ordinary citizens and litigants: If judicial appointments stay opaque, the public won't know in advance what kind of judge could end up hearing their case in court.
• For trust in the judiciary: This debate over accountability in appointments could strengthen future demands for reform and greater transparency in how judges are chosen.

Questions & Answers

1. What has Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said?
He said the collegium system's lack of transparency allows people who call communities 'ants' to become judges and later escape accountability.

2. Where did he make this statement?
He made the remarks at an event by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy at the India International Centre in New Delhi, while releasing 'The Judicial Transparency Index' report.

3. What did he say about the 2025 collegium meetings?
He said no clear reason was made public for the appointment or transfer decisions taken in three collegium meetings held in 2025.

4. Which High Court judge's remark was referenced?
Justice Bhuyan did not name anyone, but a former Allahabad High Court judge had sparked controversy with remarks at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event in 2024.

5. What happened after CJI Surya Kant's 'cockroach' remark?
It led to an online movement called the 'Cockroach Janta Party,' which led protests over the NEET paper leak issue.

6. What change is Justice Bhuyan calling for?
He wants public discussion on candidates before judicial appointments and clear published reasons behind appointment and transfer decisions.

https://trendkia.com/en/national/paradarshita-ki-kami-se-nyayapalika-men-ghusa-ate-hain-napharati-bayana-dene-vale-loga-justice-ujjal-bhuyan-ka-bara-bayana-12826
TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.