What to Read in The Hindu Editorial (Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: The judiciary’s ‘between a rock and hard place’ moment

Context

There are ways to fix problems like misconduct, corruption, and appointments while still keeping the judiciary independent.

Introduction

The details of the Justice Yashwant Varma case are quite troubling. A fire broke out in an outhouse at his official bungalow in New Delhi while he was out of town. The fire department reportedly found several sacks filled with ₹500 notes, some of which were partially burned. Someone from the police or fire department recorded a video while firefighters were said putting out the fire.

Judicial Controversy: Justice Yashwant Varma Case

• The Delhi police chief reported the incident to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court.
• The matter was then conveyed to the Chief Justice of India (CJI).
• The CJI convened a Collegium meeting and decided to repatriate Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court.
• Justice Varma denied storing any money in the room and suggested a possible conspiracy against him.

 

Public Outcry and Further Actions

• As the news spread, public outrage prompted the CJI to hold additional Collegium meetings.
• An in-house inquiry was ordered, led by a three-judge committee:
  1. Two Chief Justices from the Himachal Pradesh and Punjab & Haryana High Courts.
  2. A female judge from the Karnataka High Court.
• The CJI requested call records of Justice Varma and his staff from the past six months.

 

Transparency Measures Taken

• The CJI decided to release all related information publicly, including the video of the currency notes.
• The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court was advised not to assign any judicial work to Justice Varma until the inquiry concluded.

Awaiting Inquiry Findings

Key Issue	Action Taken
Allegations of misconduct	Inquiry by a three-judge committee
Public concerns	Information made public, including videos
Judicial workload	Justice Varma was relieved of duties temporarily

• While Justice Varma’s explanation seems unconvincing, the final judgment depends on the inquiry findings.
• The committee’s report will provide clarity on the incident and its implications.

 

A triggering of the government

• Government’s Response and Judicial Appointments Debate: The public uproar over the Justice Yashwant Varma case has given the government an opportunity to interfere in judicial matters.
  1. The government is now using this incident to push for control over judicial appointments.
• Reviving the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act: The Vice-President of India, who is also the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, has invited political leaders from both the ruling party and the Opposition.
  1. The discussion revolves around reviving the NJAC Act, which was previously struck down by the Supreme Court.
• Key Provisions of the NJAC Act

Component	Details
Appointment Committee	Included the CJI, two senior judges, Union Law Minister, and two eminent persons.
Selection of Eminent Persons	Nominated by a committee comprising the CJI, the Prime Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
Administrative Control	The NJAC secretariat was placed under the Law Ministry.

• Supreme Court’s Ruling on NJAC: The NJAC Act was struck down as it violated the basic structure of the Constitution.
  1. A seven-judge bench ruled that:
     • The Act allowed significant government interference in judicial appointments. 
     • This would undermine judicial independence, a core principle of the Constitution.
• Despite being passed as a constitutional amendment, the Court declared it invalid.
• The government’s renewed push for the NJAC Act signals a potential conflict between the judiciary and the executive over the power to appoint judges.

 

Government’s game plan

• The law mandates that the Collegium of the Supreme Court selects judges, while the government can return a name once for reconsideration.
• If the Collegium reiterates its recommendation, the government must notify the appointment.
• However, the Modi government has:
  1. Delayed or ignored Collegium recommendations for years.
  2. Refused to notify appointments of independent-minded judges.
  3. Fast-tracked appointments of judges who align with its ideology.
• Impact on Judicial Independence:
  1. The Collegium has sometimes compromised by selecting judges preferred by the government to ensure some of its own recommendations are accepted.
  2. This has led to the appointment of:
     • Judges aligned with the government’s Hindutva ideology.
     • Weak judges who do not challenge the government.
     • Result: Judicial independence has weakened significantly in recent years.
• Government’s Push for Greater Control: The Justice Varma case is being used as a pretext to seek more power over judicial appointments.
  1. If successful, this would:
     • Further erode judicial independence.
     • Strengthen the government’s control over the judiciary.
• Concerns Over Government Overreach

Issue	Government’s Actions	Impact
Judicial Appointments	Delays, selective approvals	Weakens independent judiciary
Fundamental Rights	Misuse of enforcement agencies	Suppression of dissent
Rule of Law	Bulldozing legal processes	Undermines legal system

 

The Need for Public and Political Resistance

• The government’s agenda must be exposed and resisted by public opinion and the Opposition.
• While the Collegium system is flawed, the solution is not greater government control.
• Key issues with the Collegium:
  1. Lack of transparency in selection criteria.
  2. Nepotism and favoritism in appointments.
  3. Sitting judges are overburdened with judicial work, leaving little time for appointments.
• Judicial independence is already at risk.
• Giving the government more power over appointments will further endanger democracy.
• Instead of shifting control to the government, reforms should focus on transparency and better selection processes within the Collegium system.

 

Appointment of judges, issue of corruption

Issue	Details
Number of Judges to be Appointed	Every year, around 100 judges need to be selected for the High Court and Supreme Court.
Need for a Robust Selection Process	At least 1,000 candidates should be evaluated to ensure the best appointments.
Lack of Proper Criteria	No standardized method exists to assess candidates based on merit.

Feature	Details
Composition	Retired judges and other eminent public figures independent of the government.
Secretariat	Controlled by the commission to ensure transparency in the selection process.
Goal	To ensure a merit-based and transparent selection of judges.

 

Issue of Corruption in the Judiciary

Issue	Details
Only Impeachment is Provided in the Constitution	The only method to remove corrupt judges is impeachment.
Politicization of the Process	Requires signatures from 100 MPs and a vote in both Houses, making it highly political.
Ineffectiveness	No judge has ever been successfully impeached despite known corruption.

Feature	Details
Composition	Five independent members, free from government and judicial influence.
Function	Receives complaints from the public against judges of higher courts.
Investigation & Trial	If a prima facie case exists, the commission can investigate or conduct a trial through a separate inquiry committee.

 

Conclusion

The commission should have the final say on what to do with the judge, with court review allowed only in rare cases. These issues should not be sent to Parliament. This would help solve problems of judicial misconduct and corruption to a great extent.

Editorial 2: U.S. defence ties — India needs to keep its eyes open

Context

New Delhi must steer clear of reliance that compromises its strategic autonomy.

 

Introduction

It is well known that defence public sector undertakings rely on the Indian armed forces as their main buyers. With the ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ campaign, this dependence has grown, putting more pressure on Indian Air Force (IAF) planners as they struggle with fewer fighter squadrons due to the slow production of aircraft by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).

• After the IAF chief voiced his concerns at the Aero India-2025 show in Bengaluru this February, the media has been filled with reports about a renewed effort to deliver Tejas MK1A Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) jets.
• This month, the first rear fuselage for the Tejas, built by a private company, was officially handed over in an event attended by the Defence Minister and the IAF chief, drawing major media attention.
• As the Ministry of Defence reviews its committee report on the IAF’s needs, including possible imports, three key facts must be kept in mind.

 

SIPRI report and U.S. policy

• India’s Arms Imports
  1. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report (2020-24):
  2. India remains the world’s second-largest arms importer.However, India’s arms imports have decreased by 9.3% compared to 2015-19.
  3. Implication:
     • While this decline is positive, high-cost weapon systems such as aircraft, tanks, radars, and specialized armaments will continue to be imported for years, adding to India’s defence expenditure.
• Dependence on U.S. for Fighter Aircraft Engines
  1. The Indian Air Force (IAF) has committed to indigenous fighter jets:
     • LCA Tejas Mk1A
     • Tejas Mk2
     • dvanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA)
• Concern:
  1. All these aircraft depend on American engines, making the IAF’s operational strength subject to U.S. strategic decisions.
     • Question arises: Will India move away from its heavy reliance on Russian arms (which still account for 36% of India’s arms imports) or remain dependent?
• Current Inventory from Russia:

Russian Defence Equipment in Indian Forces	Branch
270 Sukhoi Su-30MKI fighters	Indian Air Force
S-400 missile systems	Indian Air Force
Various big-ticket military assets	Indian Army & Navy

 

India-U.S. Defence Relations: Short Shelf Life of Policies

• Over the last two decades, multiple U.S.-India defence initiatives have been introduced, but many have faded away quickly.
• Example:
  1. 2012: Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) – Promised to bring cutting-edge technology but failed to make a lasting impact.
  2. Recent: ‘U.S.-India Major Defence Partnership in the 21st Century’ – Can it deliver concrete results, or will it fade like previous agreements?
• Challenge:
  1. U.S. foreign policy is highly unpredictable, especially under a transactional administration (such as that of Donald Trump).
  2. India must remain cautious and self-reliant, ensuring its long-term strategic autonomy.

 

‘Partnership’ is the key word

• The Reality of U.S.-India Defense Relations: Historically, U.S.-India defense ties have been framed as a “key component” of their strategic partnership.
  1. This was reaffirmed during-
     • U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s visit (April 2016)      
     • Recent Trump-Modi discussions
• However, the core question remains: Is this a true partnership or a dependency?
• What Defines a True Partnership?: According to Anna Simons (Professor of Defence Analysis, U.S. Army War College):
  1. A true partnership is based on mutual indispensability.
  2. Dependency is not a partnership—if one side relies more on the other, the relationship becomes imbalanced.
• Key Question: Are India and the U.S. indispensable to each other?

 

Testing Indispensability: Three Key Factors

Factor	Evaluation
Equality	Are both nations equal and interchangeable in defense cooperation?
Task Division	Can they divide responsibilities in joint programs?
Complementary Strengths	Does each country’s expertise fill gaps in the other’s defense capabilities?

 

How Does India Compare in Other Defense Partnerships?

• The same indispensability test can be applied to India’s relationships with:
  1. Russia (India’s largest defense supplier)
  2. Israel (high-tech military collaborations)
  3. France (Rafale jets & other strategic deals)
• The U.S.-Pakistan case serves as a warning:
  1. The U.S. dropped Pakistan when it was no longer geo-politically useful.
  2. Could India face a similar fate if its strategic importance declines?

 

The Uncertainty of U.S. Commitments

• The U.S.’s recent disengagement from Europe raises concerns about its long-term reliability.
• Trump-era policies demonstrated that alliances can unravel quickly if Washington’s interests shift.
• India must remain cautious and ensure its strategic autonomy rather than fall into a dependency trap.

 

Conclusion: Looking ahead

Are we making the right choice by depending on the U.S. for our defense needs? The real answer depends on Washington—whether it truly wants a strong partnership with India. For that to happen, the U.S. must make India a key political ally by strengthening ties in a special way. On India's side, New Delhi must make sure its decisions protect its interests, even if U.S. policies change in the future. While India imports essential aircraft and equipment, it must stay cautious to avoid becoming too dependent, which could harm its strategic independence.