Learned Sir, for arguments or ideals sake, we can always uphold that the elected body is the strongest pillar of democracy. But isn’t that notion the most belied one independent India has ever witnessed. Besides, isn’t NJAC giving direct & indirect access to parliamentary institutions in matters of paramount judiciary concerns?
As you yourself have pointed out, independence of judiciary is an essential tenet of the Constitution. Why is it then that you believe such a commission would serve better in appointing SC and HC judges (at times when we get to hear news about PMO’s direct involvement in 2G scam). What layer of credibility are you then proposing to introduce by appointing such a commission. CJI, Prime Minister, Law Minister, Leader of Opposition etc. are very much important constitutional institutions but interlinking such institutions can create leverage points and we should have mechanism to tackle resultant complexities.
You say, politician bashing is akin to the 9.00 PM television programmes. Who’s doing most of the bashing? Politicians only. Why then blame anyone else when politicians have set the precedence themselves.
I am of the humble view that judiciary which is another strong pillar of our constitution should stand upright and independent and not lean on any other pillars like legislature or executive for its mainstay. Judiciary has to be insulated from them.
You say, Indian democracy cannot be a tyranny of the unelected. Well Indian democracy cannot be a tyranny of the elected either. In that case, we would rather have conducted general elections to appoint Judges too, democratically speaking!
PS: This is based on my limited understanding of the whole NJAC row. Any flaws in factual representation may please be pointed out.