Difference between these two sentences?

Judges are app0inted to a bench. So the first sentence should read: The right selection to the Bench will be very important.

Both sentences are awkward, however, and unlike what a native speaker of English would say. The second sentence makes it sound as though the entire array of judges on a court are to be selected at the same, which is an unlikely event. Also, the use of the word selection is a problem. Judges are appointed to a bench. So, for example, the first sentence probably ought to read The right selection of whom to appoint to the Bench will be very important. I really don't know what to say about the second sentence, which just doesn't make any sense in common usage, at least as far as concerns the American language.

No, No Setanta you have got it completely wrong. You didn't understand my question and have inferred a totally different meaning. Partly, I guess, because of my English and possibly I didn't give an idea about our Judicial system. I thought of giving a hint about it along with the question but I refrained from it thinking that you the well informed people will understand it anyway.

So, here is a further explanation of my question.

First of all thanks for answering my question and pointing out grammatical errors in my post. It helps.

Now a bit about our Judicial system. In our Courts, say the Supreme Court, there are many Judges (don't know the exact number), they all are first among equals. These Judges, in the pair of two or three, constitute a Bench which hears the cases brought to it by litigants. So in this regard I was using the term Bench. For more lucid understanding please see this http://www.vakilbabu.com/System/JSystem.htm , and in this wiki link see the composition section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_India

Now about my sentences in my first post. Actually, by the "right bench" and "right selection" I was pointing out in the direction of the particular "ideological leanings" of our Judges like Left, Right etc. you know. These things play important factor when "ambiguous" matters are brought up to the court. Hope now you would have understood my question, and can now answer it correctly or correct my sentence correctly.

Thanks

That does not alter that in English, judges are appointed to a bench. The details of your system don't alter that. Now, in the case of the second sentence, if all the members of this special bench to which you refer are appointed at the same time, then it makes sense. But one would still refer to judges being appointed to the bench. So, . . .

The selection of the right members for appointment to this Bench will be very important.

They (Judges) are already appointed. The Bench, the pair, is predetermined. So it's not a question of "appointment". It depends on the litigant, which Bench he/she wants to take their case to. In case the Judges/Bench feel, the case doesn't come under their expertise then they.. refer it to the other competent Bench. That is why I'm asking this question. Your reply - "the selection of the right members for appointment to this Bench will be very important"- implies that the litigant can choose Judges ("right members" as you said) of their choice, which is not the case here ("unfortunately"!).

Setanta, just to confirm it, in case you have read my above last reply, will your answer still work with what I'm trying to say?

Thanks

Let's say "The right selection of the Bench will be very important." is S1 and "The selection of the right Bench will be very important." is S2 ok.
Well S1 is saying the right selection, as in the correct selection, but S2 is saying right Bench, as in Bench opposite of left. You follow?