“Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark”—Delays in Judicial Elevation

Delays in judicial appointments affect every citizen whose basic human rights are protected by courts. Are the Executive and the Judiciary equally to blame for this?

- Prof Upendra Baxi

IT is not quite right to write on a judicial matter that is under the process of hearing which is yet to run its full course. The matter is made even more perilous when one has to rely on court proceedings as variously recounted in the media, with no official transcript at hand. Yet I venture an essay on what recently emerged in the Supreme Court of India (SCI) with regard to delay in judicial appointments. These concern every Indian citizen whose basic human rights are preserved, promoted and protected by the constructional courts.

This unusual narrative essay does not express any opinion on how the matter may be adjudicated finally, which is solely for Their Lordship to decide. Without expressing any opinion on the proceedings, directly or indirectly, I summarise here the leading arguments pro and con, and systematically present the ongoing judicial anxieties in order for that the constitutionally enlightened citizen may follow the further proceedings with becoming interest.

“Something is rotten in the state of Denmark,” said Marcellus to Horatio in Hamlet (Act 1, Scene 4). This saying is not used specifically about one country; and here it articulates a sense of deep angst concerning governance practices which result in substantial delays in the delayed consideration of judicial appointments and transfers.

Lok Pahari is an NGO (founded in2003)—an association of retired veteran civil servants, police officials, justices and eminent citizens—and has often successfully petitioned in the SCI on various matters relating to public administration. The association has articulated claims about clean and responsible public administration which the apex court has endorsed and elaborated. In a landmark electoral law case (