Arguments against NJAC: Critics argue that the NJAC threatens judicial independence by allowing greater executive influence over judicial appointments. The inclusion of the Law Minister and two eminent persons (selected by the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and the Leader of the Opposition) in the commission could lead to potential political interference. This setup could compromise the impartiality of the judiciary, as judges might be appointed based on political considerations rather than solely on merit and integrity.
Arguments in favor of NJAC: Supporters of the NJAC contend that it enhances transparency and accountability in judicial appointments, which the collegium system lacks. By involving members from outside the judiciary, the NJAC aims to provide a more balanced and democratic approach, reducing the risk of insularity and favoritism within the judiciary. They argue that the presence of diverse voices in the commission ensures a more comprehensive evaluation of candidates, ultimately strengthening the judiciary’s credibility.

