<<The issue at hand, however, is not about Harsh Mander or his impeccable record of dignity and peace activism. The issue is the legality, morality and consequences of the Supreme Court reprimanding and looking to punish a person who expresses criticism or lack of faith in the court. Per one report, the Chief Justice of India during the course of the proceedings observed: “If this is what you feel about SC, then we have to decide what to do with you.”
Faith in the Supreme Court is not built by the Supreme Court scaring or threatening to punish all who express lack of faith in it. It is built by actions that lead people to believe there is reason to trust the court, that the court is independent, free of fear or favour. Faith, which is diminished when the sitting apex court judge describes the head of the executive as a ‘versatile genius’; a statement which was criticised by at least two former high court judges, a former supreme court judge and even by the Bar Association of India. Faith, which is diminished when the apex court acts to delay habeas corpus petitions; when it upholds prima facie draconian laws and looks away for prolonged periods from practical suspension of fundamental rights in and Kashmir. *Faith in the court is diminished when cases in which the executive has serious stakes are delayed for too long. For instance, cases like the constitutionality of Aadhar and the constitutionality of electoral bonds* [emphasis added]. *Faith in the apex court is diminished when the court goes against the principles of natural justice, and the law laid down in proceedings concerning allegations of sexual harassment against the sitting Chief Justice of India. It is diminished when the court suggests that a petitioner before it will be deprived of his rights to invoke his rights granted by the Constitution of India because he had criticised the court in the past *[emphasis added].>> (Excerpted from: 'WHAT DOES HARSH MANDER'S SPEECH SAY ABOUT SC?' by Dushyant at < https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/opinion/columnists/dushyant/the-litmus-test-of-faith/amp_articleshow/74499957.cms?fbclid=IwAR3WgOzTHhX3EXo-M8w0_9BKnYEDz1tRZrcuye3wMo2kOXnM7k4OP2ZXAyk >.) Video clip of Harsh Mander's speech before the Jamia students, brutalised by the Delhi Police - with no legal redressal: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXS2MvqXNsM&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3XLrV4OTD-2rOYhqwOqG4YL0i7S1kdkjey8mzk__lL0x9-pUb-RYwvpWM >. This is what Harsh Mander had said: "If someone is attempting to bring darkness to the country, and we also do the same in order to fight, then the darkness will only become more severe. If there’s darkness, then the only way that can be fought is by lighting a lamp. And if there’s a huge storm, we will light a lamp against the darkness. *The only answer we have to their hate is love* [emphasis added]. They will resort to violence, they will instigate us to indulge in violence but we will never carry out any violence. You must understand that it is their plan to instigate you towards violence so that when we commit 2% violence, they respond with 100%. We have learnt from Gandhi ji how to respond to violence and injustice. We will fight with non-violence. *Anyone who instigates you toward violence or hatred, they are not your friends *[emphasis added].” *That uplifting one is called a "hate-speech"."Goli Maaro Saalon Ko!" is a marker of patriotism.A truly Orwellian world!* As regards the institutions: <<In the video, Mander can be heard saying, “This fight will not be won in the Supreme Court. We have been observing the Supreme Court since some time now in the cases of NRC, Ayodhya and Kashmir. Supreme Court has failed to uphold humanism, equality and secularism. We will keep trying in the Supreme Court, it is our Supreme Court, but the decision will neither happen in the Parliament nor in the Supreme Court. What will be the future of this country – you all are the youth – what sort of country do you want to leave for your kids – where will this decision happen? One, it will happen on the streets, we have come out on the streets…” – the video is stopped mid-way.>> The quote cited in the very beginning *follows* in due course. (For the text cited above: < https://www.altnews.in/clipped-video-shared-to-claim-harsh-mander-instigated-violence-in-jamia-speech/?fbclid=IwAR1PxpFr_-_IjEVdhf-4q2CHWhX-DveEa9oHYeHnBbRZr3KdrxhtdQ6314o >.) For sometime now, as noted by various observers, as had been experirenced during the Emergency, the Supreme Court itself is emerging as its worst enemy (ref. e.g.: < https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/opinion/columnists/by-invitation/is-the-sc-abdicating-its-responsibility/amp_articleshow/70812765.cms?fbclid=IwAR1TenxV7oo6eff_iddOvledFVk-6zGzqpkPNbDGPkpKBECDJ-WvlLisz6E>). The most abrupt drop, however, came under Ranjan Gogoi as the CJI, who apart from his judicial pronouncements notched up a record of sorts by being the first CJI to be accused of sexual, and other, harassment by a female sub-stuff directly attached to him. His handling of the charge had drawn adverse comments also from the ranks of judiciary itself (ref.: < https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/justice-ranjan-gogoi-sexual-harrassment-case-clean-chit-supreme-court-5741244/> and < https://theprint.in/judiciary/justice-chelameswar-says-due-process-not-followed-in-cji-gogoi-sexual-harassment-case/238867/ >). For some useful accounts of his overall track record: < https://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/ranjan-gogoi-gifts-government> and,, also, < https://theprint.in/national-interest/why-the-root-of-delhis-hindu-muslim-riots-is-a-malevolent-creeper-planted-by-supreme-court/373115/?fbclid=IwAR0nvZ0tVjjw8yyHwvf0VD-f2TS0AKQm9ykAATCCnJPaYYvMJIzsvvlfhcU >. Similar evaluations of the incumbent CJI's works would, understandably, be available only after he retires. In the meanwhile, the declaration of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights her intentions to file an intervention plea on behalf of her office in the case on the CAA, pending before the Supreme Court for a while, has further added to the witches' brew. Regardless of whether the plea is eventually filed or, even more importantly, is entertained or not, it makes the conduct of the Indian Supreme Court, in this case, come under international spotlight. Whether it despises it or not, its credibility will be on trial in the court of informed international opinions - fairly beyond the reach of the Court. <<The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, has signaled her intent to file an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act. The Ministry of External Affairs has opposed this, stating that the Act is “an internal matter of India.” It further went on to characterise the United Nations body as a “foreign party” and the intervention itself as bereft of “locus standi” as it related to “issues pertaining to India’s sovereignty.” Should the intervention be seen as an interference in the country’s internal affairs?>> (Excerpted from: < https://scroll.in/article/955177/un-human-rights-chiefs-caa-plea-puts-the-spotlight-on-indias-international-law-obligations?fbclid=IwAR2lPMmffw3l1QNmdU6Tyg7d1Wrd4Ez167N0hM8VE8GvTbqCC5szPK5lPa4 >.) That would be a different ballgame altogether. Sukla -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/greenyouth/CACEsOZjPHRPGzVpfDLtkWnm2WUMG31QkKFF_exAKRRs7Hz9PNA%40mail.gmail.com.
