A group of fifty-six retired judges – including two former Chief Justices of India – issued a statement on 26 August expressing their ‘disagreement’ with the recent statement issued by another group of retired judges who criticised Union Home Minister Amit Shah over his remarks on the Opposition INDIA bloc’s Vice Presidential candidate B Sudershan Reddy.
The statement called upon brother judges to desist from lending their names to politically motivated statements.
“We, as former judges of this country, feel compelled to place on record our
strong disagreement with the recent statement issued by a group of retired judges and activists,” the latest statement from former judges read.
On 26 August, at least 18 former Supreme Court judges and chief justices of High Courts, as well as some activists, had criticised Union Home Minister Amit Shah for publicly misinterpreting the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Salwa Judum case.
“It has become a predictable pattern, wherein every major political development is met with statements from the same quarters. These statements are determined to cloak their political partisanship under the language of judicial independence. This practice does a great disservice to the institution we once served, as it projects judges as political actors. This erodes the prosperity, dignity and neutrality that the office of a judicial officer demands,” read the Tuesday’s statement.
Shah had last week told news agency ANI in an exclusive interview that Sudershan Reddy, a former Supreme Court judge, rejected Salwa Judum and thus “ended the right of self-defence of tribals.”
Two former chief justices of India, Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Ranjan Gogoi, are among the 56 former judges included in the new statement.
Justice Sathasivam (retired)served as the 40th Chief Justice of India from 2013 to 2014. After retiring from his judicial career, Sathasivam was appointed the 21st Governor of Kerala from 5 September 2014 to 4 September 2019.
Ranjan Gogoi, who served as the 46th Chief Justice of India from 2018 to 2019, was nominated to the Rajya Sabha by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in March 2020.
A fellow retired judge has chosen, of his own volition, to contest the election for the office of the Vice President of India, the statement read, referring to the Opposition INDIA bloc’s Vice Presidential candidate B Sudershan Reddy.
“By doing so, he has stepped into the political arena as a candidate supported by the opposition. Having made that choice, he must defend his candidacy like any other contestant, in the realm of political debate. To suggest otherwise is to stifle democratic discourse and to misuse the cover of judicial independence for political convenience,” it read.
The judges included former Chief Justices of the Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi, Bombay, and Kerala High Courts. It also includes Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, former Judge of Kolkata High Court, who is now a BJP MP from West Bengal.
Judicial independence, the former judges said, is not threatened by the criticism of a political candidate. “What truly tarnishes the reputation of the judiciary is when former judges repeatedly issue partisan statements, giving the impression that the institution itself is aligned with political battles, ” they said adding,”as a result of these tactics, because of the fault of a few, the
larger body of judges ends up being painted as partisan coterie.”
‘Judiciary must be kept above such entanglements’
This is neither fair nor healthy for India’s judiciary or democracy, the statement read.
“We therefore strongly call upon our brother judges to desist from lending their names to politically motivated statements. Let those who have chosen the path of politics defend themselves in that realm. The institution of the judiciary must be kept above and distinct from such entanglements,” it read.
Reddy (79), who retired from the apex court in July 2011, of “supporting” Naxalism and claimed that Left Wing Extremism would have ended by 2020 in the absence of the Salwa Judum judgement. In response to Shah’s remarks, Reddy had asserted that the verdict was not his but that of the Supreme Court. He said Shah would not have made the remarks had he read the complete judgement.
What is Salwa Judam?
Salwa Judum was a “vigilante” group or militia formed in Chhattisgarh in 2005, which used armed tribal civilians to combat Maoism.
Shah said in the interview that Salwa Judum was formed by Adivasis who wanted education, roads and healthcare. “It was meant to protect them, which the Supreme Court disbanded,” the Union Minister said.
The July 2011 judgment authored by Justice Reddy and Justice SS Nijjar had disbanded Salwa Judum in Bastar, Chhattisgarh for being illegal and unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court bench had ruled that using tribal youths as Special Police Officers in the fight against Maoist insurgents was illegal and unconstitutional.
The ruling was delivered while BJP under chief minister Raman Singh was in power in Chhattisgarh.
Judicial independence is not threatened by the criticism of a political candidate. What truly tarnishes the reputation of the judiciary is when former judges repeatedly issue partisan statements.
judicial independence, Amit Shah, retired judges, politics and judiciary, India, Salwa Judum, judges vs judges, salwa judam, amit shah on salwa judam, who will be india's new vp, veep election, vp election, who is jagdeep dhankar, b sudershan reddy
#Judges #Judges #criticism #Amit #Shah #Salwa #Judum #barb #Oppn #pick #painted #partisan #coterie