Law letterImpeachment of JudgesLet's establish check and balance A procedure for removal of Judges of the Supreme Court by way of add ress of the Houses ofParliament to the President for 'proved misbehavior or incapacity' is going to be revived in our constitution by upcoming 16th amendment as the cabinet approved a proposal to amend the constitution to restore parliaments' authority to impeach udges! "he original constitution #of 1$%&had empowered parliament with the authority to impeach! (y virtue of the supreme udicial council a udge can be removed from his office for his incapacity or gross misconduct under article $6 under of the constitution! )e should reach at a solution where both udiciar y and legislature s ounds in harmony! " here can be two procedures one is complaint procedure and other is motion p rocedure* under complaint procedure one can file a complaint before supreme udicial council against a udge about his prima facie misconduct or incapacity! "hen if the council finds the allegation true e!g! proved* then it can be sent to the house for motion procedure! +n this system both udicial and legislative ,udos can be end orsed! (ut in no way parliament can come first to ta,e the procedure in account* this is the ob of council! As per the provision udg es will be impeached for proved misconduct and incapacity! " his means a udge can only be impeached in parliament when the allegation brought against him is proved beyond reasonable doubt! -ow the .uestion is who will conduct the proof procedu re* certainly it rests upon council not the h ouse! (ecause there is a urisprud ential principle that 'nemo judex in parte sua'which means 'no person can udge a case in which he or she is party or in which he/she has an interest'! 0urthermore the term 'misconduct' needs to be epressed with utmost certainty by prescribing specific bits and pieces only upon which a udges can be said to h ave committed misconduct! (ut the proposed the 16th amendment may destroy the chec, and balance between legislature and udiciary and thus independence of udiciary may be at sta,e which may lead to politicising the udiciary! Just imagine a situation 2 if the Supreme Judicial Council is abolished and the present parliament gets bac, its earlier authority* it migh t ta,e action against some udges! +f the government changes and another party come to power* it will ta,e action against some others 3udges4 and it will continue! +s it possible for every time for any party to hold two third maorities in parliament5 +f it is not be so* how will udges be impeached then5 +f any party holds so* then udges will be removed and appointed wholesale on the basis of whim of that ruling party! And this would be easy by virtue of Article %of our constitution! Such a situation will definitely lead the udges to be politicised and influenced for the sa,e of protecting his office conse.uently independence of udiciary and 'udicial review' will be at sta,e! )e are not tal,ing about complete separation of power in the .uest of independence of udiciary rather we are tal,ing about* as 7r! Ambed,ar says* harmo nious governmental structure!
