If the operating system inside these constitutional bodies is good, appointment based on party allocation is ok. It can function well as long as the appointed members are generally 'ok'. It will be really difficult task to get a "100% clean man". In the past, even some of the supreme court chief justices had questionable past, but as they got to the position, they have maintained their "सम्माननीय" status.

Same thing is happening in public service commission (lok sewa). Even if the members and chairman are appointed according to party allocation, they have maintained its image of 'impartial' commission. The working procedure (karyabidhi) is made in such a way that no one can go against it unless they are unanimous.

Back to CIAA, if there are 5 commissioners (including chief), when it is time to decide on proposals/cases prepared by legal team of government attorneys hired consultants, the chief participate only if there are 2-2 on each side. And, each commissioner (and chief) who have already achieved a higher level of position in public or private sector will feel hesitant to propose in the commission meeting to withdraw a case (or proceed with a case) if the case clearly lacks supporting proofs.