One after another, there are numerous confirmations how the collegium system was rigged.
People managed to get  recommendations and ultimately appointments and  also succeeded in obstructing appointments of persons on personal likes or dislikes or because a particular individual is really fair and independent. Several persons were denied recommendations only because they did not revere the decision makers as per their expectations or did not serve their interest or did not yield to their one time whim at one point of time and acted really fairly.Subordinate judicial officers have always been targeted for being really fair and independent.


Former SC Judge K.T. Thomas also voiced his opinion regarding the Bill and defended the Collegium system. He writes, “What is the guarantee that only persons of impeccable and proven integrity, coupled with the moral strength to assert their dissent (if any) on record, would fill up the JAC? Having been a member of the collegium of the Supreme Court, I know how outsiders seek (and get) access so as to canvass for the decision-making process. I doubt that the situation would change if the proposed composition of the JAC were to be implemented. I am also not prepared to say that the selection of “eminent persons” would not become diluted in due course, particularly because of the vagueness in standardizing who these “eminent persons” can be. I am skeptical of the outcome of the JAC in the long run, given that the scope for manipulation and favoritism cannot be fully eliminated even within it.”