North India Statesman
[ad_1]
News India Live, Digital Desk: Judicial Services: A recent decision of the Supreme Court regarding the recruitment of judges in the judiciary has launched a big debate. A major organization of the country’s lawyers, the ‘All India Lawyers Union’ (AILU), expressed his deep concern over the decision and urged the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to reconsider it.
In fact, the Supreme Court has recently changed one of its old verdicts and arranged that now it is not mandatory to have a minimum experience of advocacy to appear in judicial services (such as civil judges) examination. According to the new rule, any person having a law degree (LLB) and any person registered as a lawyer can appear in this examination.
Why do lawyers object?
The ‘All India Lawyers Union’ believes that this decision is not good for the quality of justice. He has argued in his letter to CJI that only book knowledge is not enough to become a judge. The practical knowledge that is received from working as a lawyer is very valuable.
According to him:
-
What is the atmosphere of the court room?
-
What are the nuances of advocacy?
-
What is the relationship between lawyers and their clients?
All this can be learned from experience. AILU says that without experience a person would sit directly on the judge’s chair, he may not be able to understand the practical challenges of the justice process properly, which could affect his decisions.
Interestingly, in the year 2002, the Supreme Court had recommended mandatory experience of advocacy of at least 3 years for the recruitment of judges. Now the same decision has been overturned, which aims to bring young and talented people directly into the judiciary. But this organization of lawyers is giving more importance to “experience” than this “freshness”.
Now it will be important to see if the Supreme Court rethinks its decision, paying attention to these concerns of the lawyers.
Jio’s Value for Money Plan: Get unlimited calling, 200GB data and free apps in ₹ 749
