A Word To Milords
Seldom, if at all, do the proponents as well as the opponents of the vexed collegium system delve much into the antecedents of its coming into being.
So, here we
go; first, in pursuance of a committed judiciary, it was Justice AN Ray’s
elevation, by the supersession of three senor most Supreme Court judges in 1973,
followed by the side-lining of Justice HR Khanna in 1977 for having been the
sole defender of the citizen’s
right to life and liberty during India’s infamous internal
emergency. Then, adding insult to injury was the 1980 direct induction of Justice
Baharul Islam, the jurist-politician, on the vaunted bench, all orchestrated by
the dictatorial daughter of the autocratic Nehru. Yet, when Indira was alive,
the successive justices conceded her executive right to appoint the judges,
though in consultation with the Chief Justice (First Judges
case, 1981). It was only a decade after her death that the judiciary made bold
to wrest the initiative from the executive with the Second Judges case (1993). But
with the disarray of successive central sarkars thereafter, in 1998, the
emboldened Milords through the Third Judges Case became the Lords unto
themselves in their Collegium Rings. That is fencing themselves from the executive
arm, once and for all.
Now that they
had long avenged their slights and had the last laugh too a decade back in
negating the NJAC Act, it’s time for Milords to take stock of the untenable situation
in which our judiciary has come to lay, and this word is meant just to be an
aid. And what is their argument against the unanimous NJAC – the mere presence
of the Union Law Minister in the selection committee of five would impinge upon
judicial independence! LOL. So, by the same logic, the selected judges should
be toeing the judicial line drawn by the collegium Milords, right. Oh, how
specious, but they are gray-haired enough to know that independence of mind and
living by the principles are the characteristics of spirited men and women, but
that is just an excuse to hold on to their usurped power to further their
nepotistic causes.
With around one
lakh cases lying on
their own benches and sixty-five lakhs in high courts under their watch and
ward, not to speak of over five crores in the so-called lower courts, if it’s
not the time for the collegium lords to self-introspect, then it has only to be
at the calamity. It’s but natural that their judicial time leaves not much time
for attending to the herculean task of finding the right judges to adorn the
higher benches, made difficult by the prevailing state of our compromised polity.
So, lacking the wherewithal to venture into the discovery channel besides being
hard-pressed to dispense justice in time, is like falling between two stools.
Surely, Milords cannot be unaware of the fact that they have bitten off the
judicial cake more than they could chew. Why, they are even incapable of
filling around thirty percent of their high court benches, not to speak of speeding
up PMLA proceedings! Whatever, they could not be insensitive to the abysmal
state of the judicial affairs, taken as a whole, hamstrung with mundane ailments
one too many.
So, the question that naturally arises is why won’t they untangle themselves
from the tangled collegium web for personal relief as well as for the public
good. Well, judges are human too, and power intoxicates them no less, made
worse by our extra selfish times. If, by chance, Milords have read thus far to develop
second thoughts, then they may go through further for a welcome denouement.
"Ay, sir. To be honest, as this world goes, is to be one
man picked out of ten thousand"- Hamlet to Polonius.
That was then, and if Shakespeare were to revise it now,
Hamlet would’ve said ‘out of hundred thousand’.
So to say, the clue to the honesty drop of our times was
provided by Andy Hargreaves, “There is no morality without temptation;
otherwise it is just lack of opportunity”.
However, be it in the world of yore with limited
opportunities or in the modern times with unlimited avenues, the honest are few
and far between but the Bard of Avon wouldn’t have meant that the rest of the
multitudes were patently dishonest. The master’s intent would’ve been that rarely
are men innately honest but the vast majority of them lack the conviction to be
upright, regardless. In other words, the bulk of the people by nature are
character-neutral and by disposition are fence-sitters. It’s thus, the ethos of
an organization comes to be shaped by the upright or deviant, as the case may
be, and that counts.
It is in this context that the exceptional thinking of the
much-maligned Joseph Goebbels, expressed in his ‘Addendum to
Adolf Hitler's Testament’ that brings forth another Shakespearean dictum ,
”Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied, / And vice sometime by action
dignified", becomes eminently relevant.
“The Führer has ordered me, in the event of the collapse of
the defense, to leave the Reich capital Berlin and to
participate as a leading member in a government appointed
by him.
For the first time in my life I must categorically refuse to
obey an order of the Führer. My wife and my children join me in this refusal.
Otherwise—quite apart from the fact that for human reasons and reasons of
personal loyalty we could never bring ourselves to leave the Führer alone in
his most difficult hour—I would regard myself for the rest of my life as a
dishonorable renegade and a contemptible scoundrel, who, together with his
self-respect, would also lose the respect of his people,
which would have to be the prerequisite for any
further service by me in shaping the future of the German
nation and the German Reich.
Amid the delirium of betrayal that surrounds the Führer in
these critical days of the war, there must at least be some who stand by him
unconditionally and unto death, even if this contradicts a
formal order, however well-founded, that he expresses in his
political testament.
I believe that by doing this I am rendering the best service
to the German people for its future, because in the difficult times that lie
ahead, examples are more important than men. There will always be men who show
the nation the way to freedom. But a reconstruction of our national
life would be impossible if it did not develop on the
foundation of clear examples comprehensible to everyone.
For this reason, together with my wife and in the name of my
children, who are too young to express themselves but who, if they were of the
necessary age, would unreservedly join in this decision, I declare my
irrevocable determination not to leave the Reich capital even if it
falls, and rather to end a life at the Führer's side that
has no personal value for me if I cannot devote it in
the service of the Führer and at his side.
Given in Berlin, 29 April 1945, 5:30 a.m.
Dr. Goebbels” [Emphasis supplied]
What examples the collegium benches had set for the judges it
inducts into the judicial system – Not one but two Chief Justices went judicial
overboard to protect a notorious woman of judicial pedigree from being
prosecuted for her wrongdoings though their brother judge said that she should
be hauled up as a fraudster. While some bails have become the instruments of
favour, the ideological biases emanating from some of the benches even foul the
country’s atmosphere. So to say, in all such cases, miscarriage of justice is
not only done but is seen to be done, without any remorse or shame, not even
later-day regret. But on the contrary, the fear to face the truth grips the
ultimate bench in that save the honourable Justic Gogoi exception of the Ram
Janma Bhoomi litigation, it is dead scared of dispensing justice in case of Kashi,
Mathura etc. That successive CJIs should lack the courage to resolve the
country’s cultural vexations speaks for the lack of character and the absence
of conviction in the collegium benches.
Given that our society has become grossly corrupt, by and
large that is, it is a matter of segregating the honest grain from the dishonest
chaff that is bound to be beyond the narrow collegium vision as that is
possible only through a broad NJAC search. If anything, the scandal of the
burning bundles underscores this well and true – how come Justice Verma was so
unabashedly unashamed is the question. Why not; he could only be cursing his
bad luck that burnt all his ill gains (is it so); how fair it is to expect him
to forego whatever might be in his retirement store, especially as much of his biradari
continues to make merry, without let or hindrance that is.
However, I for one believe that Justice Surya Kant is better
than most of the collegium-era Chiefs and as I dedicate this word to him as
it’s a product of his address in the recent Ram Jethmalani Memorial Lecture, I
urge him to grasp the Goebbels moment of his destiny to change our country’s
judicial course. That’s by bringing the curtains down on the ugly collegium
drama that is being staged for far too long. Maybe, he can give a thought to it
as it comes from the maternal grandson of the
upright C. Kameswara Rao, author of ‘The Law of Damages and Compensation’ among
others, who was wont to advocate only the just causes that tended the Judges of
the District Court in Kakinada, where he had practiced, to pre-judge their
merit.

.jpg)




