Renowned legal professional and senior Congress MP Kapil Sibal last week accused the NDA executive of "continuously assaulting the judiciary" while echoing Justice Jasti Chelameswar's view that the Centre used to be "putting collegium recommendations on the back burner if the names are not to its liking".
Sibal used to be quoted as saying in a media report, "They have first filled educational institutions with RSS pracharaks. Now, they are trying to infiltrate the judiciary with people having such mindset."
A couple of weeks in the past, Sibal had retorted to CJI Dipak Misra's court docket remark that he should learn historical past via saying he used to be both a pupil and teacher of historical past. Sibal is easily versed within the judiciary's historical past too, we are certain. Probably, he needs to refresh his reminiscence, particularly as a result of he is likely one of the few in Congress strenuously pushing for transferring a removal movement towards CJI Misra in Parliament.
The January 12 press conference via senior SC judges led via Justice Chelameswar towards the CJI had attracted magnetic improve from Left leaders friendly to a rebel judge. The Congress, within the strategy of changing outdated warhorses with high stallions to keep the birthday celebration chariot competitive for the derby of basic elections, determined to money in at the situation as many necessary instances, together with politically usable Ayodhya and dying of judge B H Loya, have been being heard via a CJI-led bench.
Some Congress lawyer-MPs saw the opportunity to hit laborious with a removal movement as the judiciary used to be pink sizzling with an inside dissension fuelled via one person's insatiable desire to wreak vengeance as a result of he may no longer become CJI. Personal ambitions undoubtedly motive disturbances within the standard functioning of a machine, be it judiciary or politics. And we undoubtedly don't deny what Justice Chelameswar stated in his March 21 letter, quoting Robert H Jackson, that "men are more often bribed by their loyalties and ambitions than by money".
Attempts are on to get the draft movement signed via 50 Rajya Sabha MPs, the quantity required for transferring it in Parliament. Before we discuss with pages of judicial historical past to grasp Sibal's remark that the NDA executive is trying to fill judiciary with "such mindset", a dialogue at the fallout of a removal movement towards the CJI will lend a hand perceive the gravity of the location.
Today, the Congress with 54 MPs in RS would possibly smartly be capable of convey a removal movement towards the CJI, howsoever frivolous or imaginary the charges may be. Tomorrow, the NDA, which too has greater than 50 MPs in RS, may cook dinner up some charge to convey a removal movement towards the No.2 within the SC. Another birthday celebration can get started a marketing campaign for a removal movement towards the third within the SC hierarchy.
Where will it end? Which judge will willingly become CJI in the sort of dreadful situation and risk his dignity and popularity? Worse, will this sort of political one-upmanship no longer drive a judge to verify political improve ahead of turning into CJI to counter threats of removal?
Bringing a removal movement towards a CJI or a judge in response to unverified fees has a numbing effect at the institution and stunts public religion in it. Lawyers become MPs no longer as a result of they're great politicians. Success in court docket brings them cash and fame, accelerating their upward thrust in political parties. When they attempt to cow down the judiciary via casting a shadow via a phantom removal movement, it is comparable to an attack at the very tree that nurtured their growth.
Unlike as of late's Congress, led via a younger president Rahul Gandhi, the birthday celebration split in 1969 after a sour war between veterans on one aspect and the younger Turks at the other led via Indira Gandhi. The split diminished her executive to a minority, however she endured as PM with improve from Left parties. The landmark SC decision in Golaknath case in 1967 curbing Congress executive's power to amend the Constitution and the political pink nostril caused via the 1970 Privy Purses judgment forced Indira to name mid-term polls.
A heady 352 seats in Lok Sabha in 1971 bolstered her resolve to infiltrate the SC with "committed judges". The activity used to be meticulously carried out via law minister H R Gokhale, the Bombay HC judge turned flesh presser; steel and mines minister S Mohan Kumaramangalam, a barrister and previous a prominent communist leader; and S S Ray, another barrister and a detailed confidant of Indira.
To overrule an 11-judge bench decision within the Golaknath case, the SC determined to arrange a 13-judge bench for Kesavananda Bharati case. Eight SC judges have been appointed simply ahead of the hearing in Kesavananda case began to verify most of them found place within the 13-judge bench for afavourable ruling.
Justice P Jaganmohan Reddy in his e-book 'We Have Republic' wrote, "Of these eight, two have been stated to be Gokhale's nominees (D G Palekar and Y V Chandrachud of Bombay HC); one among Kumaramangalam (Ok Ok Mathew of Kerala); two of Ray (S C Roy and A Ok Mukherjea) and two from the PM (M H Beg and S N Dwivedi); just one used to be CJI S MSikri's nominee (H R Khanna). One died ahead of the case used to be heard. Of the seven who heard the case, 5 upheld the government's perspective.
A mythical researcher on SC judges, George H Gadbois, wrote, "Seven of the nine Sikri era appointees have been members of the Kesavananda bench, and 5 of these did improve what can be considered the government's wishes. But they have been within the minority with A N Ray. Khanna, who cast the deciding vote, and Mukherjea joined the 5 pre-Sikri era court docket appointees within the majority."
The 7-6 majority carved out the basic structure doctrine while fortifying and reinforcing Golaknath judgment much to the chagrin of Indira, whose executive wreaked vengeance an afternoon after the Kesavananda judgment used to be delivered on April 23, 1973, via announcing that A N Ray, fourth senior most SC judge, will be the new CJI to supersede Ok S Hegde, J M Shelat and A N Grover. The 3 resigned. The judiciary used to be to undergo many painful wounds inflicted via Congress governments within the succeeding years. We will narrate the ones any other time. The above instance is supposed to refresh Sibal's reminiscence about "attack on judiciary".
As a celebrated legal professional, Sibal will have to discharge his debt for the fame he has earned in the course of the judiciary. He has talent, wisdom and craftsmanship to distinguish himself from hawkish politicians, whose feathers resemble the ones of Gokhale, Kumaramangalam and Ray. The selection is his.
Sibal used to be quoted as saying in a media report, "They have first filled educational institutions with RSS pracharaks. Now, they are trying to infiltrate the judiciary with people having such mindset."
A couple of weeks in the past, Sibal had retorted to CJI Dipak Misra's court docket remark that he should learn historical past via saying he used to be both a pupil and teacher of historical past. Sibal is easily versed within the judiciary's historical past too, we are certain. Probably, he needs to refresh his reminiscence, particularly as a result of he is likely one of the few in Congress strenuously pushing for transferring a removal movement towards CJI Misra in Parliament.
The January 12 press conference via senior SC judges led via Justice Chelameswar towards the CJI had attracted magnetic improve from Left leaders friendly to a rebel judge. The Congress, within the strategy of changing outdated warhorses with high stallions to keep the birthday celebration chariot competitive for the derby of basic elections, determined to money in at the situation as many necessary instances, together with politically usable Ayodhya and dying of judge B H Loya, have been being heard via a CJI-led bench.
Some Congress lawyer-MPs saw the opportunity to hit laborious with a removal movement as the judiciary used to be pink sizzling with an inside dissension fuelled via one person's insatiable desire to wreak vengeance as a result of he may no longer become CJI. Personal ambitions undoubtedly motive disturbances within the standard functioning of a machine, be it judiciary or politics. And we undoubtedly don't deny what Justice Chelameswar stated in his March 21 letter, quoting Robert H Jackson, that "men are more often bribed by their loyalties and ambitions than by money".
Attempts are on to get the draft movement signed via 50 Rajya Sabha MPs, the quantity required for transferring it in Parliament. Before we discuss with pages of judicial historical past to grasp Sibal's remark that the NDA executive is trying to fill judiciary with "such mindset", a dialogue at the fallout of a removal movement towards the CJI will lend a hand perceive the gravity of the location.
Today, the Congress with 54 MPs in RS would possibly smartly be capable of convey a removal movement towards the CJI, howsoever frivolous or imaginary the charges may be. Tomorrow, the NDA, which too has greater than 50 MPs in RS, may cook dinner up some charge to convey a removal movement towards the No.2 within the SC. Another birthday celebration can get started a marketing campaign for a removal movement towards the third within the SC hierarchy.
Where will it end? Which judge will willingly become CJI in the sort of dreadful situation and risk his dignity and popularity? Worse, will this sort of political one-upmanship no longer drive a judge to verify political improve ahead of turning into CJI to counter threats of removal?
Bringing a removal movement towards a CJI or a judge in response to unverified fees has a numbing effect at the institution and stunts public religion in it. Lawyers become MPs no longer as a result of they're great politicians. Success in court docket brings them cash and fame, accelerating their upward thrust in political parties. When they attempt to cow down the judiciary via casting a shadow via a phantom removal movement, it is comparable to an attack at the very tree that nurtured their growth.
Unlike as of late's Congress, led via a younger president Rahul Gandhi, the birthday celebration split in 1969 after a sour war between veterans on one aspect and the younger Turks at the other led via Indira Gandhi. The split diminished her executive to a minority, however she endured as PM with improve from Left parties. The landmark SC decision in Golaknath case in 1967 curbing Congress executive's power to amend the Constitution and the political pink nostril caused via the 1970 Privy Purses judgment forced Indira to name mid-term polls.
A heady 352 seats in Lok Sabha in 1971 bolstered her resolve to infiltrate the SC with "committed judges". The activity used to be meticulously carried out via law minister H R Gokhale, the Bombay HC judge turned flesh presser; steel and mines minister S Mohan Kumaramangalam, a barrister and previous a prominent communist leader; and S S Ray, another barrister and a detailed confidant of Indira.
To overrule an 11-judge bench decision within the Golaknath case, the SC determined to arrange a 13-judge bench for Kesavananda Bharati case. Eight SC judges have been appointed simply ahead of the hearing in Kesavananda case began to verify most of them found place within the 13-judge bench for afavourable ruling.
Justice P Jaganmohan Reddy in his e-book 'We Have Republic' wrote, "Of these eight, two have been stated to be Gokhale's nominees (D G Palekar and Y V Chandrachud of Bombay HC); one among Kumaramangalam (Ok Ok Mathew of Kerala); two of Ray (S C Roy and A Ok Mukherjea) and two from the PM (M H Beg and S N Dwivedi); just one used to be CJI S MSikri's nominee (H R Khanna). One died ahead of the case used to be heard. Of the seven who heard the case, 5 upheld the government's perspective.
A mythical researcher on SC judges, George H Gadbois, wrote, "Seven of the nine Sikri era appointees have been members of the Kesavananda bench, and 5 of these did improve what can be considered the government's wishes. But they have been within the minority with A N Ray. Khanna, who cast the deciding vote, and Mukherjea joined the 5 pre-Sikri era court docket appointees within the majority."
The 7-6 majority carved out the basic structure doctrine while fortifying and reinforcing Golaknath judgment much to the chagrin of Indira, whose executive wreaked vengeance an afternoon after the Kesavananda judgment used to be delivered on April 23, 1973, via announcing that A N Ray, fourth senior most SC judge, will be the new CJI to supersede Ok S Hegde, J M Shelat and A N Grover. The 3 resigned. The judiciary used to be to undergo many painful wounds inflicted via Congress governments within the succeeding years. We will narrate the ones any other time. The above instance is supposed to refresh Sibal's reminiscence about "attack on judiciary".
As a celebrated legal professional, Sibal will have to discharge his debt for the fame he has earned in the course of the judiciary. He has talent, wisdom and craftsmanship to distinguish himself from hawkish politicians, whose feathers resemble the ones of Gokhale, Kumaramangalam and Ray. The selection is his.
Difficulty of being CJI in the shadow of politics over removal
![Difficulty of being CJI in the shadow of politics over removal]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
April 02, 2018
Rating:
