Editor,
The reprinted editorial “Who Will Judge the Judges” (ST, Dec 19, 2019), is a timely reminder to the government, citizenry and the judiciary itself. It is written by none other than Fali Nariman, the Harvard-educated lawyer, who at the time of authorship was a practicing lawyer in the Supreme Court. Since then he has been appointed to the bench of the apex court, one of the very few Supreme Court judges who has been elevated directly from the Bar. Having been both lawyer and judge, he has a privileged and authoritative position.
From this article it is eminently clear that there are no effective procedures to evaluate the performance or probity of judges. The policy of self-regulation has been shown time and again to be a dead horse. So journalists or the ordinary citizen has no recourse, when a judge does wrong. The accusation of ‘contempt of court’ is repeatedly misused and redress or remedy is well-nigh impossible. Even the most prestigious media houses usually give wrong-doing by judges a wide berth, knowing that charges of contempt are impossible to counter argue.
Journalists are soft targets. We expect them not only to report the facts, but also provide us with analysis and commentary. Politicians love to hobnob with prominent journalists but are quick to vilify the media. Trump’s meme of ‘fake news’ is a convenient slogan. The White House recently revoked the press pass of a CNN correspondent because he asked uncomfortable questions. Worse still, a journalist in Manipur has been imprisoned for a year for year for criticizing the state government. Even if he used offensive language, that is not cause for jail time. Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, according to Samuel Johnson, and some politicians fit the bill by accusing critics of sedition.
But we expect the judiciary to generally uphold the profession of journalism, as the fourth estate provides balance to the functioning of democracy. But thin-skinned judges sometimes dispense with propriety when their selfish and self-centered impulses are exposed. Journalists are hauled before the court, only to be berated and humiliated. The substance of the accusation is given a peremptory go-bye. Judges seem to be above the law.
Some are not averse to political ambitions. With the recent conviction of Sajjan Kumar, the role of Justice Ranganath Mishra is once again exposed. He presided over an inquiry commission that whitewashed the perpetrators of the pogrom that murdered 2700 Sikhs. After retirement he joined the Congress Party and was rewarded with a Rajya Sabha seat. Need anymore be said.
This oft-quoted aphorism by George Bernard Shaw comes to mind: “Every profession is a conspiracy against the laity”. Even the medical profession is called to account, “Physician, heal thyself”. It’s time we came up with something similar for judges.
Yours etc.,
Glenn C. Kharkongor,
Via email
Wanted Freedom of the Press
Editor,
Apropos the show-cause notice by the High Court to the Shillong Times editor and publisher for an informative news report based on Justice SR Sen’s Court Order on providing various perks and facilities to retired judges and their family members went viral as the latest news. This Order issued by a single-bench presided by Justice Sen reads that the Court will be compelled to take suo moto contempt against the officers if not complied within a week. Justice Sen is to retire in March 2019.
After going through the Second National Judicial Pay Commission July 2018 and the 7th Central Pay Commission report, it is obvious that there is a conflict of interest and Justice Sen would profit directly from his decision.
The question here is, why Justice Sen did not recuse himself but instead issued a Show Cause Notice to the journalists who discovered this misconduct? I have often heard that Justices here in Shillong compare themselves to God and Kings and tried living like one. “The King can do no wrong” they think without realizing that it is the British Constitutional Principle and is not applicable in a democratic republic.
In everyone’s opinion, the news report of The Shillong Times is not derogatory, baseless or an attempt to malign the Court. It is very much within the Fundamental Right of Free Speech and Expression. Anyone can get a copy of the Order and read it for themselves.
In recent times there has been a significant increase of cases where journalists have been threatened, intimated and even killed. The rule of law can be provided only by a strong, dedicated judiciary but when we hear that on December 13, Ms Mukhim who was asked to appear in person before Justice Sen was asked about her educational qualifications and on being told that she is BA (Hons), B.Ed, the Judge in the open Court said “you are not fit to be a journalist, not qualified.” She was also asked who appointed her. On being told that the newspaper management did, the Judge retorted, “The management should also be put in.” In a democratic country of written Constitution where Judges ought to be careful in authoring words and expression, the tyrannical behavior of the Judge makes one feel like we are living in Uganda – the land of Idi Amin where till today Human Rights Watch still reports about such behaviors of the political rulers of that country who control all media by simply asking the educational qualification of the journalists who run the media.
Freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right under article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India which includes freedom of the press and circulation.
Justice Sen has passed some landmark judgments that this Court has ever seen but what a shame that his last days will vitiate all of that only to walk out vanquished and sink into oblivion.
Yours etc.,
Febrieanna Syiemlieh,
Via email