Senior Advocate Fali Nariman has concluded his arguments in the NJAC case. Nariman is appearing for the lead petitioner in the case, Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association..In his concluding arguments, he conceded that though he is opposed to the NJAC, the Collegium system was far from ideal and there was widespread dissatisfaction with the Second Judges’ case..Subsequently, Senior Advocate Anil Divan started his arguments. He began by stating that the Bar is unanimously opposed to this particular Amendment (bringing in the NJAC), if not with the idea of a Judicial Appointments Commission in general. He quoted from the Constitutional Assembly debates, to drive home the point of non-interference of the executive in the judicial appointments..Arguing further on the issue of executive interference, he said,.“I remember my time at the Bombay Bar. There were mostly commercial matters, hardly any writ petitions. Now, there are a large number of them being filed. The Government is the largest litigant. Is it then appropriate to involve the Government in the process of selection of judges?”.Referring to the arguments of the Respondents that there was no other country in the world where a Collegium system of appointment existed, he said that this was no reason for challenging the same in our country..“Does any other country have a Kesavananda Bharti [case]? This was a unique case- this was a case that Seervai himself said saved the Constitution of India”. .Arguing further about the unique nature of the country, Divan said that,.“India is like a mini-Europe. There is great diversity. And what keeps this diversity together is our judiciary. Is it then not important that it be kept independent and separate from the executive?”.He pointed out that in the United Kingdom, where a similar Commission exists, it is explicitly provided that the Executive Secretary will not be a member but will only have a consultative role..Justice Khehar, however, pointed out that the executive has one big advantage when it comes to appointing judges in that the executive alone has the resources to collect information on individual appointees..“Whether you like it or not, the only organ of the Government that is competent to collect information on individuals, which has the resources for the same is the Executive”, he said..The hearing will now resume on July 7.