I find this is again a last minute change of mind on the part of the Drafting Committee. In the clause in question we have fixed the number as ‘7 other Judges’ apart from the Chief Justice. The amendment would reduce the number by substituting the words ‘not more than 7 other Judges’? In fact under the amendment it would be possible to appoint less than 7 judges. I do not know on what basis the original article was conceived and passed by the House. If there was not enough work, then that was the time to introduce suitable amendments in the text. The House has not been given any indication as to the exact amount of work which the Federal Court has or the Supreme Court will have on and from the 26th January next. In fact these changes should be based upon actual figures or actual estimates or work which would be in the hands of the Judges. I believe that the removal of the Jurisdiction of the Privy Council and also giving the Supreme Court the right over criminal matters, general superintendence and various other matters connected with the Constitution, there would be enough work for the Supreme Court on and from the 26th January. So this over-caution in respect of the number of Judges being placed in the discretion of the Government would be wrong. We should proceed on the basis of actual or estimated amount of work which the Court will have on and from 26th January. It is for this reason that I have asked for deletion of this amendment.
