Jittery Judiciary
Month of march seems to be unsettling for higher judiciary in this part of the world. Pakistan's Chief justice is overthrown by its military president for alleged misuse of his power and in India couple of supreme court (SC) benches' observations/statements were reflecting that of cinematic 'punch' dialogues and stupid sentiments. In fodder scam case, the bench observed, while passing a judgement on the convicted executive of Bihar state, that "persons of their (corrupt people) ilk have to be hanged in lamp-post in busy roads intersection in front of people" much in line with certain middle-east countries punishment. The bench added "the laws dont permit us to do so" (Note the quotes in italics are not verbatim. However the statements made are similar to the one given in the above italicised statements). Circa 1AD a king of southern india broke down and died of guilty conciousness because he wrongly convicted a guy and got him killed. More recently a SC judge as one of the two-member commission who was hearing a disproportionate wealth case against a state CM broke down in his court amidst his co-bench judge, attorneys of either sides, special attorneys. The reason is this judge received a letter allegedly casting aspersions on the non-partisan nature of the judge in the commission.
I am lost her. With all due respect to the learned judges I feel these observations and incidents are not suting to their diginity and high-strature. Its like acts of gimmick to gain some attention/mileage from the happenings than anything worth of a judiciary functioning. Agreed, judges and judiciary are not interpreters of law/constitution merely per book but by spirit. Still they cannot term or act or observe something that is of redundant or useless in nature and are added just for the sake of it. In the former case the observation could have been merely stating something like corruption has become omnipotent and this court observes that the action taken against it does not seem to alleviate or eliminate it. it is a serious cancer to the society and nation. Such a statement would have very well sent the message across. But observing it in different way serves little purpose as it serves as food for digression (of this blog nature) at various levels. We have the legislatures (and their chairs) waiting for opportunity to pound on judiciary at any time and this becomes a fodder to them. In later case break down merely makes one to feel that a very senior, highly experienced judge can succumb to cheap threats and this badly projects that the judiciary is very weak. The 1AD king's name figures in history in positive sides ofcourse because he was unable to bear the pointing figures (to be). It was less in the capacity of a judge and more in the capacity of a failed ruler. A ruler cannot make gross injustice to his subjects (per his constitution). A ruler is a visionary. He has to think of his subjects' welfare and has to act accordingly. Any wrong step in it would bring bloat to his rule and more would lead the nation to weakness and anarchy.
Judges are not visionary, in the sense they cannot do something that gives fruit in long run (or even short run) for people governance. It is nothing to belittle their capability but to merely state their position. They have to always review & validate an event in conjunction with law/constitution and pass orders accordingly. Their capacity does not allow anything beyond that. Knowing this fully the legislature is often unnecessarily passes comments on judiciary. Judiciary has to just swollow these comments, brush them aside and have to move forward in their single-pointed agenda. Given such a situation these kind of acts by the learned judges would definitely add fuel to the digression resulting in improper functioning of democracy.
So let the judges be not turn themselves to point of mockery by these kind of cheap acts.
I am lost her. With all due respect to the learned judges I feel these observations and incidents are not suting to their diginity and high-strature. Its like acts of gimmick to gain some attention/mileage from the happenings than anything worth of a judiciary functioning. Agreed, judges and judiciary are not interpreters of law/constitution merely per book but by spirit. Still they cannot term or act or observe something that is of redundant or useless in nature and are added just for the sake of it. In the former case the observation could have been merely stating something like corruption has become omnipotent and this court observes that the action taken against it does not seem to alleviate or eliminate it. it is a serious cancer to the society and nation. Such a statement would have very well sent the message across. But observing it in different way serves little purpose as it serves as food for digression (of this blog nature) at various levels. We have the legislatures (and their chairs) waiting for opportunity to pound on judiciary at any time and this becomes a fodder to them. In later case break down merely makes one to feel that a very senior, highly experienced judge can succumb to cheap threats and this badly projects that the judiciary is very weak. The 1AD king's name figures in history in positive sides ofcourse because he was unable to bear the pointing figures (to be). It was less in the capacity of a judge and more in the capacity of a failed ruler. A ruler cannot make gross injustice to his subjects (per his constitution). A ruler is a visionary. He has to think of his subjects' welfare and has to act accordingly. Any wrong step in it would bring bloat to his rule and more would lead the nation to weakness and anarchy.
Judges are not visionary, in the sense they cannot do something that gives fruit in long run (or even short run) for people governance. It is nothing to belittle their capability but to merely state their position. They have to always review & validate an event in conjunction with law/constitution and pass orders accordingly. Their capacity does not allow anything beyond that. Knowing this fully the legislature is often unnecessarily passes comments on judiciary. Judiciary has to just swollow these comments, brush them aside and have to move forward in their single-pointed agenda. Given such a situation these kind of acts by the learned judges would definitely add fuel to the digression resulting in improper functioning of democracy.
So let the judges be not turn themselves to point of mockery by these kind of cheap acts.
posted by Kupps at 7:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home