tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post6397542170020357695..comments2023-09-21T16:17:51.838+05:30Comments on Law and Other Things: Environmenal Consultation and Expanding the Supreme CourtAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09348738084817273397noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-45105681383225597222008-02-23T05:56:00.000+05:302008-02-23T05:56:00.000+05:30The Venkatachaliah committee recommended raising r...The Venkatachaliah committee <A HREF="http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/op/2002/05/21/stories/2002052100050200.htm" REL="nofollow">recommended</A> raising retirement age for both SC and HC judges by 3 years (an extremely modest change and quite inadequate I think). Ram Jethmalani introduced a <A HREF="http://rajyasabha.nic.in/bills-ls-rs/2005/XXXIV_2005.pdf" REL="nofollow">bill</A> in 2005 to raise the retirement age of HC judges to 65. The Union Law Minister was <A HREF="http://www.hindu.com/2007/03/25/stories/2007032523561000.htm" REL="nofollow">reported</A> last year to have agreed to consider raising the retirement age year in response to a question in the house. And these are probably only a small fraction of the attempts actually made at reforming the system. As you pointed out, the Law Commission reports have provided a number of other suggestions some of which do not require legislative sanction. The question is why, despite all these analyses and initiatives, virtually no movement is seen on any of these fronts. Is it the political economy of the bar that is hindering change as you suggested? That is the foremost question that needs to be asked.Dilip Raohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18294894305584371011noreply@blogger.com