In a fatally flawed process, the commissioners tasked with advising the president as he chooses a new chief justice instead ensured he could not appoint whomever he wants.
I am asking myself as to how was the previous process of selecting and shortlisting for the JSC's interviews and recommendation of the CJ's post handled? Who forwarded the four candidates to the JSC for interviews and was there a criteria laid out to the JSC Commissioners to follow in determining the fitness of the candidates?
A very sound summary of what occurred in the JSC proceedings
I agree with you that it is astonishing that the members did not make a comprehensive constitutional assessment well in advance of what their true function is in this kind of matter.
However, I am inclined to think that the chairperson was correct in taking the view that a candidate's opininion on this issue is not relevant.
Finally an article which is on point on every aspect of this saga. You move Mr President
I am asking myself as to how was the previous process of selecting and shortlisting for the JSC's interviews and recommendation of the CJ's post handled? Who forwarded the four candidates to the JSC for interviews and was there a criteria laid out to the JSC Commissioners to follow in determining the fitness of the candidates?
Apt, concise & narrows down some of the discomfort many of us felt last week with the JSC process. We'll done Dan.
A very sound summary of what occurred in the JSC proceedings
I agree with you that it is astonishing that the members did not make a comprehensive constitutional assessment well in advance of what their true function is in this kind of matter.
However, I am inclined to think that the chairperson was correct in taking the view that a candidate's opininion on this issue is not relevant.