The dignity of individuals and institutions rests mainly on how they conduct themselves through their words, dispositions and deeds. So too with the Supreme Court. It waded into an avoidable row now over its response to comments from Leader of Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, about the “losses” India suffered vis-à-vis the Galwan Valley military engagement. That fight was against Chinese attempts at intrusions into Indian soil in 2022. While the court has stayed the proceedings against Gandhi in a defamation suit filed by the Border Roads Organisation director and others, the tone and tenor in which the bench made some pronouncements are unacceptable and uncalled for. The voice of the Leader of the Opposition is the voice of the people. Moreover, he’s leader of the nation’s main political establishment, the Congress party, which remained central to India’s post-Independence history. It is not in the realm of the Supreme Court to decide what a leader occupying such a high position should say or speak. Take for granted that he speaks up for the people. In this context, what Jagdeep Dhankar, as Vice President, stated recently about the judges is worth remembering –that some of them showed a tendency to exceed their briefs. He called a spade a spade. The Supreme Court is not the Oracle of Delphi. The Constitution has granted it a role, which is of protecting the Constitutional tenets, rule of law, and such matters.
Rahul Gandhi had made statements in 2002 and a few days ago, saying India lost some 2,000/4,000 sq-km of territory to the Chinese in the 2022 fight. He had quoted sources, which were naturally from outside of the establishment; and he said Prime Minister Modi must give a reply. Later, the PM denied such loss of land. Both their statements were in order. Yet, it is natural that a defamation case reached up to the Supreme Court. The court may handle it in a fit manner. But dignity demands that judges respond to such situations in a dignified manner. The reputation of an august institution is at stake. At the same time, the statements of Rahul Gandhi and PM Modi, put together, confused the people as to who was right. That confusion continues. Notably, after the 1962 War, when Jawaharlal Nehru was the PM, China was reported to have grabbed Indian land measuring 38,000 sq-km from India’s Aksai Chin region. Nehru’s explanation that those were barren lands, where no grass grew, had been taken with a pinch of salt. Loss of land is a serious matter, be it then or now. Unlike Nehru, it’s natural for Modi to create a smoke-screen and avoid speaking the truth. The claim, as part of the petition, that the morale of the jawans was hurt or affected by such statements about the losses, may have a grain of truth. Yet, in a democracy, people have the right to know what has happened. Neither the military nor courts need to project themselves as sacred cows.
