In a move that shook the ethos and established traditions of
one of the crucial three pillars of the democratic apparatus, the Indian
Judiciary, four most senior judges of the Supreme Court took to the public to
address grievances that faced the institution.
 |
| Supreme Court senior-most judges addressing the media on Friday, January 13, 2017 (Photo: Reuters) |
ALLOTMENT OF CASES
The judges said that the CJI is only first among equal,
nothing more or nothing less. They expressed concern over CJI’s way of assigning
cases to the benches and deciding the composition of the same. Without going
specific, the letter that the judges produced, read cases “having far-reaching
consequences for the nation and the institution had been assigned by the Chief
Justice of this court selectively to the benches "of their
preference" without any rational basis for such assignment.”
A case in point is the medical admission scam, where a bench
headed by Justice Chelameshwar referred the case to a constitutional bench but
the CJI asserted his right as the master of the roster and put together a
five-judge bench reversing Justice Chelameshwar’s order.
MEMORANDUM OF PROCEDURE
Another issue that the judges noted in the letter and put
before the media was over the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) of appointment of
the judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. In 2015, the Supreme Court had
declared unconstitutional the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC)
that the parliament had constituted, saying that it violated the independence
of the judiciary. Later, in March 2017, the top court had sent a reformed MoP
which the Center had neither objected to nor approved. In October, however, another bench of the
Supreme Court commented that the issue of the MoP should not be delayed any
further.
The letter that the judges addressed to CJI pointed, “When
the Memorandum of Procedure was the subject matter of a decision of a
Constitution Bench of this Court in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record
Association and Anr. Vs. Union of India [(2016) 5 SCC 1] it is difficult to
understand as to how any other Bench could have dealt with the matter”.
JUSTICE LOYA’S DEATH
In the press briefing, Justice Gogoi affirmed to a query by
a journalist that sought if Judge Loya’s death was a matter of discussion in
the judges’ meeting with CJI yesterday. CBI judge Brijgopal Harkishan Loya
was hearing a case regarding the encounter of Sohrabuddin Sheikh but died
during the duration the case was in court. There were speculations if Justice
Loya’s death was natural and the Bombay High Court seized the petition. But
Supreme Court admitted to a similar petition filed before it despite objections
from lawyers.
REACTIONS TO THE JUDGES MOVE
While CJI has not reacted to the historical move of the top
judges, former Chief Justice R M Lodha has remarked the CJI must show
‘statesmanship’.
The judges’ move has also elicited different responses from
across the political fora.
The center has remarked that it will not intervene, though
Attorney General KK Venugopal remarked, Supreme Court judges’ press conference
‘could have been avoided’.
Congress President Rahul Gandhi said that an independent
probe should be initiated in Judge Loya’s death.
BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra countered the Congress saying,
“No politics should be played. Surprised and pained that Congress which has
been rejected number of times by people in elections is trying to gain
political mileage, it has exposed itself."
The Supreme Court Bar Association has said that instead of
addressing the media, the judges’ could have met the Association. The SC Bar
Association is to address the media over senior judges' allegations today.
THE SUM UP
Though questions about the righteousness of the unprecedented
move of the top judges to address the media prevail, the event brings forth to
light how ill-quipped our judicial system is to deal with its own grievances.
If instead of addressing the media, should the judges have approached the
President is also being debated.
Regardless, the grave situation has presented the need for a
system within the judiciary that checks on the absolute authority of office of
CJI. It has also brought an opportune moment for the center to implement the
NJAC.
While the debate is hot, one can guided by what J. William
Fulbright said, “In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith”.
Comments
Post a Comment