Public opinion on the appointment of new Supreme Court judges in India is diverse and leans towards skepticism. While there is appreciation for informative content regarding the judiciary and some approval of individual judges' credentials, substantial criticism exists about the collegium system's lack of transparency and the potential influence of nepotism, favoritism, and political interference. There are strong calls for reform to ensure meritocratic and democratic appointments, with some remarks highlighting concerns about caste and representation.

Supreme Court of India

Indian Government

Collegium System

[deleted]

I heard that courts in India have summer holidays like schools, wtf is that🤦‍♂️

MadOptimist

Successive Indian governments have crippled the judiciary, and the current one is trying to cripple it further. 

90% of cases are by or against the government, of which a good majority are frivolous in nature. I'm not saying this but Supreme Court's sitting judges have said this 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/supreme-court-litigation-centre-states-frivolous-unnecessary-228234

In addition to this, the government does not want to appoint judges, they sit on appointment files as long as possible. They do so so that Supreme Court collegium agrees to appoint corrupt judges who give judgements in favour of the government. 

The state of the Supreme Court is very bad, you will not believe the things that happen over there.

asdfghqw8

Have you heard that CJI yap? He's just yapping away all the damn time and does shit that flat headed bell ringing moron. When the ELECTION commission bill was passed unconstitutionally, making it lopsoded to the ruling party, there was a plea to call of the election or delay it. They didn't. They are a bunch of inbred greedy grubby puppets.

Adventurous-Roll-333

They are not enough courts and judges to hear cases compared to our population. Government have also failed to close the loopholes used to drag cases in court

You would rarely see any election promise to build more courts or increase law enforcement

Noobodiiy

Coz it's meant to be based on a book that's written, modified and implemented by cunning people known as politicians. Whatever that connects with a political entity is always ruined. Take any example, may it be education or roads or anything. Judiciary is also the same.

__I_S__

Because india spends something like 0.08% of its GDP on judiciary.  

We get what we pay for.

Bombay High court is also very slow about judgement delivery #afraidjudiciary 

No_Doughnut427

Cos we Indians are smart af and we always fight for important things like religion, Temple , Mosque , What my neighbors should be allowed to eat, What my neighbors should be allowed to wear. 

Hence policy makers also focus on these important things. 

Stupid millionaired thats why are leaving Indian and settling down in foreign countries that are less developed and have poor quality of life and poor judiciary system. 

I mean 99.9% Indians dont have a single percent trust on police system. We all know that unless we are politically connected or powerful, Police is not gonna write our FIR but have you ever seen people uniting and asking for reform in Police working structure. Cos fighting Hindu Vs Muslim is more important.

__Krish__1

Judges like every other public servant have targets to feed their own boss who in turn will feed the higher ups in judiciary or the government. Everyone is busy trying to achieve their targets and earn for their own in the process. Performance does not matter as long as you are pumping money in the right channels and there is absolutely no incentive to perform. You will be penalised if you try to be proactive. PERIOD. To all my friends, do whatever you can to support a complete overhaul.

Immediate-Chip1857

bcsac

Because the laws are made in parliament and our “netas” always make laws which are loose enough to protect them if they get caught for any reasons. Leniency in laws is the reason of procrastination.judges too have to abide by the weak laws which are made by parliament.

Resident_Audience123

CavalryR3b00t3d

Judges need only privileged families to become judges/lawyers. Clat exam fees is 5000 ₹. Once you get the taste of what it's like to be a judge and its privileges, you push your children towards this profession too. Judges are one of the most edgy character you can find in a court. There's literally no one to question you cause sabki fat ti hai aapse.

SlySpyNebula

Won't change, India's ruled by nepotism : Politics, Business, Law, Education.

Hard to break it down unless everything is reduced to Performance reports  , else you just need to pull your family contracts.

Jeetard15072003

Part of it is why engineer families produce engineers, doctor families produce doctors. They have the connections, and know the route to take. Maybe there is some nepotism too. And of course, political connections, for example, one of the judges in Nupur's case in the SC is an ex Congress MLA.

xdesi

&gt;Why are the judges not appointed by the elected representatives

That would be another shitshow

Gray_Jedi_1

The current Govt did try to rectify this by establishing National Judicial Appointment Commission in 2014. However the SC declared this as unconstitutional and upheld the collegium system.

One big problem is that while we did accept the English aspect of the English Common Law, we did not accept the 'Common' aspect of English Common Law!

As a result, every judge is free to interpret the law as per their understanding and the decision in one state high court is not binding on another state high court! So while one state may say child marriage is allowed in certain religions, another state will say it is not allowed at all. 

I think we did the exact opposite here, while we should have adopted the Common aspect, we adopted the English aspect.

m0h1tkumaar

Judges appointment is very closed process with less transparency.In India judges appoint themselves and they don't let executive or parliament to interfere in their business.Nepotism in judiciary is very less debated subjected due to fear of contempt of court or respecting independence.Thats why we can see judges from particular family/caste are appointed frquently

because mulana mudi even after 303 seats is incapable of simple farm reforms....let alone judicial reforms....?

ghanta-congress

India is not democracy its just elected dictatorship of powerful people

OrdinaryNet2175

Its very clear. In India we have a dumb system where "JUDGES APPOINT JUDGES", central government has almost zero say in it. But this system was not there from the starting. Judiciary bullied its way to get this new system. It all started because another stupid dictator of a PM Indira Gandhi was changing and appointing judges left right and centre at her whims and fancies. So much so that she superceded her favorite junior judges over their seniors to make her favorite judge as the Chief Justice of India. Hence after emergency was over, the Judiciary over a sysytematic jurisprudence devised over three different SC cases called the "The Three Judges Case", usurped the power of appointment. Thus central govt can at max launch an investigation on the character of a judge, but the decision of CJI and the other judges who make the collegium, on who will become the next judge is final. Supreme Court has said that the process where the central givt has to consult the chief justice, in that process "consultation" means "concurrence" of CJI. Thus the collegium which is already full of elite judges, who have been lawyers and judges since generations will naturally favour their own kith and kin and children. Its like a brotherhood. Judge's make sure their child do law. After they have been lawyer for a few years these same judges in collusion with their friends will get their own children appointed as a new judge. And the cycle continues. This is the reality of Higher Judiciary in India. Most injust systmem to do justice. Hence you have families and families of judges like a royal house and it was Indira Gandhi that gave them the excuse to change the system.

leo__nidas

gutka_dinesh

One of my acquaintances when we were very young came and told me that this other kid came from a family of judges. As a kid I didn't understand why that mattered when you're just playing. Needless to say my acquaintance came from a family of estatement lawyers which would like to indulge in nepotism for god knows how many generations.



And the reason I say acquaintance and not friend is because he's exactly the sort of dude  I dislike. The nepotist.

Left over of the British legacy. They still have the same SOP, same arrogance, same contempt, same allegiance… but now they don’t have British Cover. We just foot their ‘Bill’. India needs a complete ‘Reboot’ not just a ‘Retrofit’.

Right-Ad-3834

toolate1257

there should be exams for judges, who score maximum should be appointed accordingly. But if there is reservation it would destroy judiciary further.

cosmosNZ

nisha_ka_nt

The collegium system is nothing but a hidden reservation system the kins and relative of judges to become judge. FK em all.

centerist_x

It is funny how getting posted in the top places in govt and private jobs needs one to clear interviews but getting to sc u just need a referral

progmaticprogrammer

Because these kids grow up in an environment already "conditioned" in a manner to nurture legal, judicious thinking at a very early stage, and coming in contact with other legal people all the time, inculcates.  They get goaded to be better than the father too.  

Why only judges, the same happens in all families of professionals like Accountants, Doctors, Lawyers etc.

* If your image is not OC (Original Content), please provide a link to the verified source under this comment or else it will be removed.
* If your image is a camera photo, please provide the location where the photo was taken, device you took the photos with and the dimensions of the image. 
* If your image is an Infographic, please provide a link to the original dataset(s) or else it will be removed.
* Screenshots of social media posts / comments and AI generated art will be removed. 


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TamilNadu) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

I am confused.. Supreme Court has already authorized this, right? How come a High Court oppose it then?

Crazy-Writer000

How on earth all cases that related to BJP &amp; issues between union vs state goes to G.R.Swaminathan ? And all those judgements being Anti TN or anti DMK 

How the collegium or Supreme court let it pass the fact that him having RSS background &amp; being biased to the core

Which_Ad_1819

Even bad Constitution turns out to be good if those running it are good - *B. R. Ambedkar*

https://preview.redd.it/7173g9ytfa2f1.jpeg?width=850&amp;format=pjpg&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=96075f50deb8344aa869922758bbdd8f05d66387

wanderrur

Petition has been purposely filed during the court vacation so as to get a favourable bench. Classic case of bench hunting. Pathetic.

Bangers_n_Mashallah

The advocate representing TN Govt (also an MP - Mr. Wilson) \*alleged\* multiple discrepancies like no time given by TN govt to submit its side and muting the mic while passing judgement. Keyword being "alleged" because I don't completely trust politicians and lawyers and he happens to be both.

I have 1000 problems with DMK government but when it comes to chancellor appointment and Guv's atrocities, DMK is a handy beast, and they have been handling it properly. If HC is giving us troubles, they will take it up with SC and the track record is good.

That being said, what's with the "nethiya paathale theridhu" and "face paathale theridhu"? What next? Haircut paathale theridhu and un address paathale theridhu ah? What you're doing is not different from being casteist. 

Question the act. Not the person's religious identity.

nowtryreboot

UGC comes under central government and if there is a conflict between state and central laws. Central ones prevails. This can't change until education is completely handed over to the state government.

razor_XI

ivanpkaramazov

beefladdu

Avanunga mogarakattaya paathale therila 🤡

Mousyr1

திருநீறும், நாமமும்.

இது இந்துத்வ ஆரிய பார்ப்பன சூழ்ச்சி.

எங்கள் அப்பா ஸ்டாலின் ஒரே கை எழுத்தில் இந்த நீதிபதிகளை பணி நீக்கம் செய்வார். இந்த ரகசியம் அவருக்கு தெரியும்.

Just wait and see!

அப்புறம் எங்க உதை அண்ணா சமாதானத்தை, சாரி சந்தானத்தை, சே! சமத்துவத்தை, இல்லை சாதனத்தை ..டெங்கு கொசு போல ஒழித்து விடுவார்.

ஒரு cutting போட்டுட்டு வந்துடறேன். 10 மணி ஆயிடிச்சி. வரட்டா!!


சங்கி ஒழிக!

Due-Midnight1600

PureSicko

Nee oothavae venam moment 😅 when I saw the judge's nethis

Badger_gs

besh besh romba nunaa iruku. pannungoo pannugo..

OkInstancenow

Polarising further; they want probably to prove they are from upper caste and support right’usm. If Supreme Court mandated for cow urine drink, they won’t have Stayed 😃

Public_Split_404

So the guy who is known to be ex Hindu munnani member is the judge...

ivecomebackbeach

Question to those supporting TN Govt's extra-constitutional law:

Are you guys fine with systematic scams on University appointments for many decades by TN Governments(Both Parties) ?! (The market price of some plum University appointments goes into Crores)

Earlier the scam used to happen just on "Recommendations to Chancellor/Guv", which will now continue more openly &amp; brazenly (if this Law goes thru) !!!

Proud_Bandicoot5235

phillyguy475

Conscious_Heron5536

Illegal is something that is prohibited by the existing constitution. Even basic structure is not applicable before 1973. As of now no act or law of parliament renders collegium illegal. Constitutional debates can be a guiding light only when there is a constitutional case in supreme court regarding such matter.

Honestly, i support the idea of the executive or legislative not interfering with the functioning or administration of the judiciary because of the level of corruption in the former branches of government.

Anyway, there's the doctrine of separation of powers that has been recognised under Art. 50 of our Constitution.

Upper-Refrigerator54

It's a club of elite oldies who are still better than corrupt politicians. 


These elite oldies select their kids , grandkids , niece and nephews as future Judges. You and I can never cross the bridge . Biggest nepotism scandal is there but our hands are tied cause Executive isn't even trustworthy. So let's just accept that it's a lesser devil for now.


Hopefully, as our country and democracy evolves and matures over period of time we'll develop a better understanding of this matter otherwise Judiciary , especially Supreme Court will remain an exclusive club of few families. 

YourSassyPikachu

Most people here are speaking in theoretical terms about independence or judiciary and the system of checks and balances. Those who have been through some stuff know that judiciary is as much corrupt, if not more, as the executive and parliament. There is nothing divine about judiciary which keeps corruption at bay.

I do believe in the absolute independence of judiciary otherwise parties in power will do just anything according to their will. But independence doesn't mean being unaccountable. Given the role of judiciary, it should lead by example when it comes to transparency related to the appointment of judges and allegations against them.

Till date, every politician or official in the country abides by the asset declaration rule, but judiciary has kept itself out of it and left it to the decision of the individual judges. How the decision is taken on which cases to hear first is also the sole decision of the judges. If there is any allegation against any judge for bribery or malpractice, the agencies have no locus standi, and they can't even register an FIR. Their vehicles flout the rules set by the Motor Vehicle act, but if any traffic official takes action against it, the next day you hear of his transfer. Any misconduct or misbehavior of a judge is subject to internal inquiry, but these inquiries often close absolving the judge. How can you expect his colleagues and seniors to punish him ?
Justice Karnan wrote about corruption in higher judiciary, and he was jailed for contempt of court. So there goes your freedom of speech too. If any media person or anyone else speaks about the misconduct of a judge, you'll be gagged and asked to retract your statements.

There are judges who have upheld the constitution, and have actually defended the democracy. But it is they whose name is used as a cover by the corrupt ones. Even on a personal level, I know a person whose father is a judge in a district court. He happened to hear a case related to an accident in which a resort owner was involved. The owner through his son informed the son of the judge about his resort and offered him a luxury car for trip to the hill station. The case was decided in his favour. The losing side was a poor family from a small town who didn't have enough money to hire a good lawyer. They lost their sole breadwinner as well as the case. And the judge went on a vacation with his family to the resort the next year.

It angers me when people say that judges are above doubt and protect people's rights. All you need is a closer look. Just don't get caught digging too deep or you'll be held for contempt too.

yetthinking

If the judges of the SC are appointed by the executive, there won't be any checks left on the executive. The existence of the SC would be redundant. (Majorly in upholding the constitution)

We don't have the supremacy of the parliament, and any unjust and unconstitutional decision can be overturned by SC. That wont be the case if judges are from the centre itself. (Even the HCs one)

We have federal structure and its important to keep the judiciary independent, if not, centre could take any decision affecting principles of federalism and keeping the power to itself.

There's a reason why we call 4 pillars of democracy. Independent nature of all can keep the checks on each other and can balance the whole.

Hairy_Ad_7387

I think thats the correct move by Supreme court. Look at USA, it is president who decides who get into American supreme court. Look what Republicans did, they waited until trump came into power and they appointed their people. Now all the cases on trumps can be squashed. He did it in 2016 and he also did ( or will do in 2025). 

It is better to have a powerful judiciary than to increqse the power of executive.

random_inga_1989

The judges are appointed by executive only. It was a question whether executive had arbitrary powers or concurrence with CJI was needed. It was during Indira’s rule where she bought amendment that PM &amp; Cabinets decisions are binding on President. Basically, PM now had arbitrary powers to pick their affiliates as SC judges. It happened during 70s when personal vendetta came in between of selection of judges.

Collegium was made so that CJIs own political inclination won’t have too much bearing on new judges selection.

Yes it is definitely not a perfect system 

But compared to the one US has where the party in power chooses judges it seems far better. You can predict the outcome of any case depending on the number of judges appointed by any party.

The problems would be better addressed if there is more transparency in the system rather than throwing the baby with the bath water.

The executive will always prefer a weak and committed judiciary ( read about HR Khanan)and if the power is handed to them they will ensure it happens.

So yes it might seem like it’s unconstitutional, but it serves well for out country.

john_wick_909

Supreme court has duty to upheld constitution.. 
in keshavanand case it held ‘basic structure ‘ need to be preserved 
Basic structure involves independence of judiciary 
To upheld independence of judiciary collegium system was introduced.
Supreme court never called it immutable, but he njac act had several flaws that could hamper independence

Plastic-Pop1267

Really Lalu Prasad Yadav choosing judges of Patna High Court would have been a great system.

teenageragain1122

Collegium was enacted in response to mandal reservation so that judiciary can be filled only with upper castes. Every judge first tries to find the surname of advocates appearing in courts so that he can favour upper castes

  
No check no balance

#DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE LINKED THREAD/SCREENSHOT.
 
Brigading is against Reddit TOS. We do not encourage such behaviour nor we are responsible if your account is being actioned upon.


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/indiadiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Isn't having CJI still better than having a Union Minister ? A union minister by default is the ally of whoever is the PM, that means, PM+Union minister forms majority in any decisions. 
Therefore the probability of getting an election Commissioner who is partial to them is extremely high.

Hence we definitely need CJI.

MaxxDecimus

1. Removing judiciary from electing any important office is a good move. Judiciary itself is not elected, people have no say there. Also, Judges have no expertise there.   Plus hoping that someone, just because he is more educated, will give better or unbiased results is naive thinking. 

The SC has a role to protect the constitution and constitutional bodies. Not run/administer it. If CEC is not following proper rules - they can put a restraint on him/her.

2. I guess the best way to elect a constitutional post (CEC, CAG, UPSC Chairman) could be through Rajya Sabha. (Like the Senate in the USA - But our politics and parties being worse than USA, Rajya Sabha may not agree to appoint anyone on time, if a party has no Majority there). 

3. 3rd way is to elect through Lok Sabha or by the Govt. It was being followed in India. And through this bill, it will be followed in future too. But we have safeguards - Govt cannot remove many constitutional posts holders at will. Plus eligibility criteria is so stringent that not everyone can become CEC (unlike Governor post - where you just have to be 35+ years of age and have good rapport with the top brass of the govt).

thesvsb

It is clearly written in as many words in the constitution that the judiciary will have NOTHING to do with the electoral process. They should stay as much away from the electoral process as possible.

chemicalbonding

Why should CJI be on a panel to elect a constitutional post equivalent to CJI? CJI cannot provide justice to Indian people but he wants to be in selection committee which is an exclusive domain of Legislative. 

It is legislative’s job to appoint constitutional position including CJI and other judges. 

That being said, the panel should have been, ideally 7 member, at least 5 member committee to elect CEC and EC. 5 members being PM, HM, VP, LOP and leader of 2nd largest opposition party. In 7 member committee, FM and chairman of Parliamentary Affairs should be added.

JasonBourne81

Hash_Party

This comment section is as braindead as they come.

beyondocean

CJI ideally should been there, BUT!

But, today we know justices are.selected through some secret process called collegium. They are not democratically elected. Today we have son of a past Chief Justice as Chief Justice. It doesn't smell good. And it is clearly not good for democracy!

Today's Justice system is not working hard enough to make themselves better. The speed of our justice system is one of the lowest in the world. Civil cases can take even 40 years to close.

Instead Justices are more interested to make decisions on education system, Burkha system etc..

Mark my words: Indian Judiciary has been the least evolved system in India, worse than even the bureaucrats. But they are considered holy and no one dares to touch them.

Once they evolve, our democratic process can reinclude them.

i would be ok with cji if govt is involved in judge selection

Titanusgamer

It’s the same process and section pane that was followed all the way till Chandrachud started to intervene. Even then in his own judgement he acknowledged that gov can make a statute which excludes judiciary in appointments of election commissioners. Even state election commissioners are appointed in same way without input from state high courts. Read more rather than following headlines

khatri_masterrace

Current government is trying too hard to save democracy, idk why but feels like India under emergency

wrongturn6969

PM + His Minister = 2 Votes
Opposition leader = 1 Vote

Chronology samajhiye.

Election Commision hum hi chalayenge!

If you're supportive of removing CJI from selecting EC, you might as well guess what crap lok sabha speaker Om Birla pulls in parliament or even Rajya Sabha speaker even though he owes them nearly nothing

WWWWWWWWWWWVWWWWWW

The question that has to be answered is Why should the CJI be included ? What is it that makes any CJI fit to be included in any government selection panel ? Let us leave the present CJI aside and not make this discussion personal. 

The logic is for being member of any selection panel is usually - individual merit and experience of having worked in that particular or related fields, seniority and/or protocol requirements. The CJI does not fit into any of these categories. He has no experience of social or public work, he has never been a part of any electoral process, constitutionally he has not been made responsible for anything except the judiciary and there is no protocol that the CJI fulfills. On the other hand, the PM and LOP are the leaders of parties that have deep knowledge and experience of the electoral process, administratively the PM and his cabinet share collective responsibility for the running of all processes as outlined in the constitution and the presence of the LOP provides a balance. For all those who are not aware of how a selection panel works is - one, lay down the QRs for the post, two - identify people making the cut as per QR, three - debate merits/demerits of each name, four - finalise choices, five - discuss to achieve unanimity and if not possible, select name by simple majority. Sounds simple but in reality it is a complex process that involves several aspects of a candidates life and personality. There are always certain red lines that if brought out by any selector will disqualify the candidate without prejudice. In a functioning democracy like Bharat, 'precedence' or 'what has been done before' plays a very important role and therefore contrary to popular belief the power to randomly select a name without it meeting precedence is very difficult. The inclusion of a 'free member', in this case LOP, only serves to ensure that precedence is not violated casually. If any break of precedence is to be carried out then strong reasons for the same must be documented by the panel.

There is a moral angle to this that makes for the CJIs inclusion in the panel untenable. The selection process involves going into aspects of a candidates personality. That means that the CJI will be privy to the private lives of a candidate. The CJI's constitutional mandate is to head the judicial structure of the nation that provides an umbrella to each citizen of certain unalienable rights. It also mandates the judiciary to have no prejudice against those who come to seek justice on any issue. Knowledge gained by the CJI about all the candidates will morally speaking, make the CJI prejudiced against such persons. Obviously, it means that the CJIs dispensation of justice involving such persons would be 'biased', and in law render him to recuse himself from hearing such cases.

Finally, if for some time we look at the past functioning of the higher judiciary, it is not a success story. That the judicial structure, process and jurisprudence in Bharat has not been a success story also tells us that the long list of CJIs since independence have not had the administrative acumen to achieve high levels of citizen satisfaction. I think they need to focus on their constitutional task rather than worrying about other aspects of governance.

AbhayOye

Nevermind_kaola

OP why don't you like current CJI, ?just curious

VividPossibility5326

Well, if you don't like the current cji then you probably won't like the following ones too because of the collegium.

Soft_Protection_965

No. Wrong. Judiciary has no Business being involved in the mechanism of Election barring their actual role of arbitration. Milards have their unaccountable fat fingers at enough places already.

snowylion


The use of CJI as a general solution for any situation that requires a neutral approach is not recommended. The judiciary can be approached in court when there are valid reasons. It is important to remember that the role of the CJI is limited to the court, which is why the well-known quote states that "Judges should pass orders and not preach."

The Indian constitution clearly separates the powers of the judiciary, executive, and legislature. The appointments are the right and duty of the legislature. Legislature are representatives of the people and include both the governing party and the opposition. Again, any suspicious appointments can be challenged in court.

If important appointments such as CEC, CJI, or LokPal were to be made by someone other than the legislature, it would pose a challenge to democracy as it would undermine the representatives of the people.

I am not suggesting that the current solution is perfect, but it is more inclusive, with the inclusion of the opposition leader, compared to the approach used since independence, where the sitting government suggests, the President approves, and makes the appointment.

curiousstrider

PM + leader of opposition + Prez or VP would be ideal.. no way CJI.. I dont see anyone more incompetent than judiciary

Specific_Confusion_3

President, PM, Leader of Opposition, CJI, Former EC. 

I think this should be the structure.

Why CJI ? What has he done to deserve thus favor?
Why not COAS or CIC or AG ?
I mean Why is CJI epitome of honesty and propreity while rest aren't ? The only job of CJI is to implement constitutional laws.

A constitutional appointment should remain with Legislature instead of selected one. Atleast they are answerable to Hoi polloi while CJI would slap a contempt case on pesky questions about appointment of CEC.

Rink1143

I might be wrong but wasn't it always like this?

Then in 2015 the judiciary made a judgement to change it and include the cji and now it's been reverted back

just_a_human_1030

Only if collegium system is abolished. A non-democratic Judge cannot be allowed to influence a democratic process.

India's Supreme Court appointed three new judges, enhancing regional representation and reaching its full sanctioned strength.

Appointment of New Supreme Court Judges in India

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want