Former Supreme Court Justice A.S. Oka emphasized the need to investigate dissent within the Supreme Court’s collegium system during a book launch event on Wednesday, following a rare public disagreement by Justice B.V. Nagarathna over recent judicial appointments. The discussion arose at the launch of “(In)Complete Justice? The Supreme Court at 75,” edited by former Orissa High Court Chief Justice S. Muralidhar, where senior advocate Indira Jaising questioned the collegium’s secretive operations and criteria for selecting future Chief Justices of India.

Oka responded to Jaising’s query about Nagarathna’s dissent against the collegium’s August 25 recommendation to elevate Bombay High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Pancholi to the Supreme Court. Sources indicate Nagarathna opposed Pancholi’s elevation due to his relatively low seniority, his 2023 transfer from Gujarat to Patna High Court, and concerns over regional representation imbalances. She described the transfer as a deliberate decision, not routine, following extensive consultations.

Oka acknowledged the public’s right to know the reasons behind such dissent, stating, “We must know what that dissent is—there’s nothing wrong in that.” However, he cautioned that full transparency, such as publicizing collegium deliberations, could compromise the privacy of lawyers considered for elevation. “If 10 or 15 lawyers are evaluated and some are not recommended, their privacy is at stake, as they return to practice,” he explained, noting that public disclosure could reveal sensitive details like their recent earnings.

Also Read: Supreme Court Orders Probe into NCLAT Bribery Claim

He stressed the need to balance transparency with privacy, suggesting that the process adopted by High Court collegiums and the government requires scrutiny. “This issue requires debate, and I’m glad it’s started,” Oka said, encouraging further discussion on reforming the collegium system.

The book, published by Juggernaut, features essays and interviews from legal luminaries like former judges Ajit Prakash Shah and Madan Lokur, and scholars like Faizan Mustafa, aiming to spark dialogue about the Supreme Court’s role in upholding constitutional justice amid challenges to its legitimacy.

Also Read: Courts Can’t Approve Bills, Maharashtra Tells SC