NEW DELHI: A Supreme Court bench examining the validity of legislation establishing the National Judicial Appointments Commission ( NJAC ) questioned the government’s rejection of the collegium system of appointing judges to superior courts that was put in place in 1993.No candidate certified as lacking in integrity or character by the government had ever been made a judge , the bench said. It added that the executive has always had a say in the process by way of certifying the character and integrity of candidates.A five-judge constitution bench headed by justice JS Khehar is dealing with a host of petitions that challenge the government’s proposal to replace the collegium system with the NJAC, which gives the executive a role in the process.The bench defended the collegium system, in which judges conduct the selection process. "Is there a single case in which the government has said that the person had no integrity but the court had pushed for his appointment? Never," Khehar told attorney general Mukul Rohatgi. "If there has, and the collegium has reiterated the recommendation (despite government objections), has any person whose name has been pushed turned out to be of no integrity?"Khehar was defending the system against criticism that it was a process in which the government had no say at all. The role of the high court collegium for instance is restricted to picking a good lawyer, he said. Then the name goes to the government, which is supposed to raise objections if any over character and integrity."If the government chooses not to put its opinion on the record, that’s its choice," Khehar said. The petitioners have accused the government of mala fide and said the new system would erode judicial independence as enshrined in the Constitution. The other members of the bench are Jasti Chelameswar, Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and Adarsh Kumar Goel.Justice Joseph sought statistics on how many high court judge recommendations had been turned down by the Supreme Court and by the government. He also wanted to know the number of instances in which the court had cleared appointments after overruling the government’s objections. The top court conceded that there was always scope for improving the existing system. The observations came during a day-long hearing, in the course of which lawyer Ram Jethmalani dubbed the twin laws ushering in the NJAC as "evil"."The government ought to have said with all honesty that it was trying to demolish the collegium system, go back to the pre-1993 system," he said. He objected to the role of the executive in the new process as "irksome". "I had to become a refugee in my own country because of what four judges, appointed in the pre-1993 period, did," he said, referring to an Emergency era ruling, which suspended citizens’ right to life and liberty.