Pranam 2 anecdotes passed on by Mr Sekar is splendid which I wrote indirectly in the last fortnight; while he can be open as far away I cannot call a spade openly but subject to the interp[retations only Well pointed out; I wrote some time back they are political aspirants. 🌹👋🙏 KR IRS 28722
On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 at 13:21, 'N Sekar' via iyer123 < [email protected]> wrote: > SC in contempt of itself: 4 ways that it fails to hold itself to standards > it eloquently demands from the public and elected officials > > Judges are not above the law or constitution. The Supreme Court of India > needs to step up to meet the standards they eloquently demand in their > verbal observations and written judgements from public officials and > private citizens alike. Every day that the Supreme Court refuses to change > and reform itself, it stays in Contempt of itself. > 9 July, 2022 > Yossarian <https://www.opindia.com/author/vsuda/> > [image: SC is in contempt - of itself: 4 ways that the court fails to hold > itself to the standards it eloquently demands from the public and elected > officials]Lady Justice > > <https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opindia.com%2F2022%2F07%2Fsupreme-court-4-ways-fails-standards-it-sets-for-others%2F> > > <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=SC+in+contempt+of+itself%3A+4+ways+that+it+fails+to+hold+itself+to+standards+it+eloquently+demands+from+the+public+and+elected+officials&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opindia.com%2F2022%2F07%2Fsupreme-court-4-ways-fails-standards-it-sets-for-others%2F&via=OpIndia_com> > > <https://telegram.me/share/url?url=https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/supreme-court-4-ways-fails-standards-it-sets-for-others/&text=SC+in+contempt+of+itself%3A+4+ways+that+it+fails+to+hold+itself+to+standards+it+eloquently+demands+from+the+public+and+elected+officials> > > <?subject=SC%20in%20contempt%20of%20itself:%204%20ways%20that%20it%20fails%20to%20hold%20itself%20to%20standards%20it%20eloquently%20demands%20from%20the%20public%20and%20elected%20officials&body=https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/supreme-court-4-ways-fails-standards-it-sets-for-others/> > > <https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=SC+in+contempt+of+itself%3A+4+ways+that+it+fails+to+hold+itself+to+standards+it+eloquently+demands+from+the+public+and+elected+officials%20%0A%0A%20https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/supreme-court-4-ways-fails-standards-it-sets-for-others/> > 834 > > In times when Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of India seem > inclined to find blame with the beheaded instead of the beheaders, it > becomes important to shine the light on the top court of our country. The > Supreme Court’s ‘victim blaming’ verbal assault > <https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/supreme-court-observation-nupur-sharma-case-analysis/> > in > court on Nupur Sharma sets a dangerous precedent for the country on the > justification of violence. Incidentally, the Supreme Court of India is > possibly the ONLY institution which has its own Blasphemy law – Contempt of > Court. Through which it judges mere mortals for daring to question the > sense, verbiage and conduct of the Justices. But, does the Supreme Court > stand up to its own test? Is the Supreme Court of India an institution that > follows what it demands unforgivingly from others or does it exist in > contempt of its own diktats? There are 4 grounds to look at: > > Flexibility in adhering to principles of Natural Justice > > There are two basic principles of Natural Justice – rule against bias and > the right to a fair hearing. > > In 1993, by means of the Second Judges Case > <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/753224/>, the Supreme Court decreed the > Collegium system of ‘Judges appointing Judges’ into existence, under the > aegis of keeping the judiciary free from interference. A system which has > no mention in the Constitution of India. No other democratic country in the > world lets the highest court’s appointments be done by itself. > > And this has had consequences. 12 of the 32 (38%) incumbent judges of the > Supreme Court, all of whom have been appointed by a collegium of SC judges, > have deep familial connections in the Judiciary and Governments (refer to > list in the appendix). In fact, 2 future Chief Justices of India are > offspring of Former Chief Justices of India. The data implies nepotism at > play – the collegium system is fostering and advancing not only those with > merit but also possibly those with familial connections. > > In August 2014 > <https://indianexpress.com/article/political-pulse/rajya-sabha-passes-judicial-appointments-bill/>the > parliament got its act together and voted across party lines for a National > Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) that would replace the collegium > system. In 201 > <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Supreme-Court-verdict-on-NJAC-and-Collegium-system/article60384480.ece>6, > a constitution bench of the Supreme Court heard a case on the > constitutionality of the NJAC and struck it down. Here is a situation, > where the Supreme Court heard a case about a new parliamentary approved > procedure to appoint Judges to the Supreme Court and ruled that the current > collegium system where the incumbent judges of the Supreme Court have the > power to appoint new judges is the ONLY fair procedure. > > This passes neither the rule against bias nor the right to a fair hearing > – surely, there is a case for conflict of interest in the Judges hearing > and deciding a matter which impacts their own discretionary power to > appoint new judges? In fact, one of the Justices, Kurian Joseph, who gave > the original verdict against NJAC openly declared in 2019 (after his > retirement) that he regrets the decision > <https://www.barandbench.com/news/regret-my-decision-in-the-national-judicial-appointment-commission-case-justice-kurian-joseph> > . > > Demanding transparency from others while exempting itself > > The Supreme Court of India seems to be particularly keen on demanding > transparency when a chance presents itself (on others). In 2018, the > supreme court ushered in electoral reforms > <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/reveal-source-of-income-sc-orders-politicians/article22771987.ece> > by > demanding that politicians (and their spouses) declare their assets and > sources of income to qualify for contesting elections. It in fact directed > “*Their > assets and sources of income are required to be continuously monitored to > maintain the purity of the electoral process and integrity of the > democratic structure of this country*”. > > And how do Judges of the Supreme Court themselves fare on the count of > transparency? As of 2019, only 7 of the 27 sitting Supreme Court Judges > <https://wap.business-standard.com/article-amp/news-ani/out-of-27-only-7-supreme-court-judges-disclose-assets-119032001066_1.html> > had > disclosed their assets. If you go by the declarations on the Supreme > Court’s website <https://main.sci.gov.in/assets-judges>as of 4th July > 2022, then only 4 of 32 sitting judges have declared their assets. > > Why is transparency a qualifying need for politicians but not for the > Supreme Court judges? > > Being a tough taskmaster on deadlines – for others > > There is a constant ring in Indian mainstream media about the Supreme > Court slamming one government department or the other. In 2021, in the > midst of the corona crisis, SC slammed the central government and “*expressed > displeasure over delay in framing guidelines for issuance of death > certificates to the families of those who died of COVID-19*“. In 2015, in > an amusing case, following Justice Joseph Kurien’s personal visit to the > Taj Mahal, the SC reviewed construction of a road next to the Taj Mahal and > as per this report > <https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/sc-blasts-up-government-taj-built-with-hammer-and-chisel-you-can-t-even-make-road-to-last-50-years-247394.html>: > “*The apex court also expressed displeasure over the quality of road > being built near the monument and said there needs to be ‘finesse’ in doing > things as people from the world over came to see the Taj.*“ > > The finesse with which Supreme Court works is best summarized on its own > statistics <https://main.sci.gov.in/statistics>page. There are 70,852 > matters pending before the Supreme Court. That’s just the supreme court. As > of March > <https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/over-4-70-crore-cases-pending-in-various-courts-govt/articleshow/90447554.cms>2022, > there are over 4.7 crore pending cases in the Indian Judicial System that > the Supreme Court oversees. Considering the penchant that Supreme Court has > for “finesse” you would imagine the courts are working overtime to clear > the backlog. Well, the Supreme Court of India takes possibly the most > vacation days in the entire world at a staggering 83 vacation days in 2022 > (excluding approx. 50 Sundays!). By contrast, the US supreme court has 10 > declared vacation days. While there is 2.44 lakh pending rape and child > abuse cases pending with the courts of India, the Judges who talk about > inordinate delays by others refuse to take a simple decision to restrict > their own vacation days till at least the critical criminal case backlog is > reduced. > > Encouraging dissent – over others > > The Supreme Court has acted as a champion for dissent in the country > encouraging > <https://www.livemint.com/Politics/SiXRDqBThdK92lfR0CRyEP/Dissent-is-the-safety-valve-of-democracy-says-SC.html?facet=amp> > “*dissent as a safety valve of democracy*” in a case linked to the Bhima > Koregaon violence in 2018. In 2021, the Supreme court ruled > <https://m.economictimes.com/news/india/govt-criticism-not-sedition-rules-sc/amp_articleshow/83213999.cms> > that > mere criticism of the government would not amount to sedition. Indeed, it > is a welcome judgement as no individual or institution should be above > board for any criticism. > > In contradiction of its own espoused values in the judgements reflected > above, Supreme Court tried and convicted Prashant Bhushan for contempt of > court > <https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/prashant-bhushan-supreme-court-contempt-case-verdict-explained-6555183/lite/>in > 2021, for among other things a tweet about “*the current CJI riding an > expensive motorcycle while the court was in ‘lockdown’ *“. Irrespective > of Bhushan’s credibility or lack thereof, that the supreme court should > waste its precious time on conducting a trial and passing a verdict on such > trivial criticism beggars the belief that SC stands by its own earlier > judgements on tolerating criticism when others were at the receiving end. > There have been several other cases where contempt has been used to silence > criticism – one of the cases being that of journalist Ajeet Bharti. > > It, therefore, comes as no surprise that after the flood of social media > criticism that Justices Kant and Pardiwala have received following the > tirade of personal opinions they indulged themselves in while hearing a > technical matter of clubbing Nupur Sharma’s FIRs, Pardiwala has now > called > <https://twitter.com/barandbench/status/1543545631511564288?s=20&t=n0dgTPGrKl93Vr4s2Ip-eg>for > regulating of Social Media criticism of judges and TMC’s Saket Gokhale has > written > <https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tmc-saket-gokhale-ag-to-initiate-contempt-proceedings-nupur-j-sharma-opindia-statement/> > to > the AG to initiate contempt action against OpIndia editor-in-chief Nupur > Sharma, who criticised the observations by the Judges. > > TMC's Saket Gokhale asks AG to initiate contempt proceedings against us:... > > TMC leader Saket Gokhale has approached the AG to initiate contempt > proceedings against OpIndia for its criticis... > > <https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tmc-saket-gokhale-ag-to-initiate-contempt-proceedings-nupur-j-sharma-opindia-statement/> > > > In summary > > Judges are not above the law or constitution. The Supreme Court of India > needs to step up to meet the standards they eloquently demand in their > verbal observations and written judgements from public officials and > private citizens alike. Every day that the Supreme Court refuses to change > and reform itself, it stays in Contempt of itself. > > *Appendix:* > > List of sitting judges of the Supreme court with familial links in > judiciary / government: > > U. U. Lalit – Son of U.R. Lalit, former add. Judge of Bombay High Court > and Senior Counsel in the Supreme Court > > Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud – Son of Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud, longest > service Chief Justice of India. In line to be Chief Justice > > Sanjay Kishan Kaul – Family of Dattatreya Kauls, with his brother a Judge > in the Delhi High Court > > K. M. Joseph – Son of K. K. Mathew, a judge of the Supreme Court of India > > Dinesh Maheshwari – Son of prominent Jodhpur advocate Ramesh Chandra > Maheshwari > > Sanjiv Khanna – Nephew of SC Judge Hans Raj Khanna > > Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai – Son of R.S.Gavai, former MP and Governor > > Krishna Murari – Nephew of GN Verma, a prominent lawyer and president of > the high court bar association > > Vikram Nath – 4th Generation lawyer in the family > > B. V. Nagarathna – Daughter of former Chief Justice of India, E. S. > Venkataramiah. In line to be Chief Justice. > P. S. Narasimha – Son of a jP S Narasimha - Son of judge, Kodanda Ramayya > Sudhanshu Dhulia - Son of K C Dhulia who was a judge of the Allahabad > High Court > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "iyer123" 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/iyer123/1178262101.2512849.1658994712495%40mail.yahoo.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/1178262101.2512849.1658994712495%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" 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/thatha_patty/CAL5XZorYi2dpUAqAe%2BKSzuPzz%3DbAPxvSMU72kM2n-Gt3YCuJjQ%40mail.gmail.com.
