He told a Press conference at the AICC headquarters here that it is the worst kept secret in the legal circles for years that this control freak, micro management and dossier loving Sarkar nd the ruling party have indulged in various manipulative tactics qua the most trusted third organ of the governance.
He alleged that the government has:
a) Excessively but selectively delayed judicial appointment proposals both to the High Courts and the Supreme Court, Justice Quereshi being only one out of many such names;
b) it has arbitrarily bifurcated approved judicial appointees’ lists to the higher judiciary, again selectively, to allow some from the original common list to be appointed quickly, while selectively appointing others after a considerable time lag, thereby irreversibly prejudicing their inter se seniority. There is more than one very recent example in a leading High court;
c) it has inaugurated an ambiance of fear, trepidation, anxiety and hesitation in the judicial sector by the misuse of dossier raj and oblique insinuations based thereupon;
d) it has tried to prevail upon judicial collegia, understandably keen to fill ever increasing vacancies, to do punitive transfers of judicial authorities perceived as inconvenient;
e) it has attempted illegally and unfairly to interfere, whenever it can and whenever it deems necessary as per its own narrow, party and ideological thinking, with judges and the judiciary in general and the legal process; and
f) it has attempted to install a section of judicial personnel vetted by it and its supporters, on impermissible tests of loyalty, ideology and commitment to itself.
INTERFERENCE: In this long, non exhaustive list of manipulative tactics, comes a clear example from Karnataka which is symptomatic of this extremely serious malaise. A sitting, Single Judge of that Court has unequivocally said:
“a sitting judge told me that “he had received a call from Delhi (name not disclosed)”. “The person from Delhi asked about me, he said. I told him that I am not affiliated to any party,”.
“He said the ADGP is from north India and he is powerful,” the HC judge said, adding that a reference was also made by the sitting judge to the transfer of another judge.
Justice Sandesh also said he had reported the perceived threat to the authorities concerned. It affects the independence of the judiciary and amounts to interference with the dispensation of justice, he said.
INTIMIDATION: When a bench of the Supreme Court made strong and pertinent observations regarding the reckless conduct of a BJP Spokesperson and the arrogance displayed by her, we saw the three-pronged attack that has become an all too familiar tool of the ruling dispensation. (1) Savage and faceless trolls spewed fake news and propaganda, (2) An orchestrated letter by “Intellectuals” was dispatched& (3) One-sided, and even contemptuous, reporting by sections of the Godi media.
The Bar, as well as the vast silent majority, stood behind the learned bench for their timely intervention that saved a situation from being exacerbated. However, by attempting to intimidate the Supreme Court, these actors unwittingly exposed the perpetrators and beneficiaries of the violence.
A sitting SC judge, Justice Pardiwala, was recently forced to observe:”Attacks attempted at our judges for the judgements will lead to a dangerous scenario where the judges will have to pay greater attention as to what the media thinks rather than what the law actually mandates.
The BJP appears to have empowered its goons with Audacity, Authority, and reckless over Adventurism to intimidate judges.Let us not forget what Arjun Ram Meghwal, BJP Minister said in 2016 in the Lok Sabha, while making a strong pitch for putting a stop to the “running commentary” by the judiciary against other organs of the State.
INFLUENCE: The entire nation is following the story of how a fact checker was jailed. What was more surprising was how, for the first time in the history of their offices, the senior law officers used their talents effectively in the defence of those whose illegal conduct had been exposed by the fact checker. They desperately and sheepishly opposed the bail on grounds that were far removed from the law.
For example, one of the arguments by the state was that sentiments of followers had been hurt by having a Seer’s hate speeches exposed! Another argument implied, without details, that the work of some shady cabal was afoot, instead of answering the Court’s queries. The irony is that such small-minded and outrightly unconstitutional claims by the authorities only serve to draw more attention to the case while embarrassing themselves.
In another development on 10th July, the Advocates’ Association of Bombay High Court at Aurangabad addressed a letter to Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju taking objection to the delays in clearing appointment of judges to the Bombay High Court. The representation has called upon the members of bar associations of all benches of the High Court to initiate protest against the delay in appointing High Court judges, until the Central government acts upon the collegium recommendations at the earliest. The letter specifically highlighted names of nine lawyers whose appointment as judges were recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium in February 2022 but are yet to be cleared.
###
