Opinion Judges judge yourselves

One of the only weeks,in more than twenty years,that this column did not appear in this space was when I wrote a piece some years ago describing the state of Indian courts.

July 10, 2011 01:16 AM IST First published on: Jul 10, 2011 at 01:16 AM IST

One of the only weeks,in more than twenty years,that this column did not appear in this space was when I wrote a piece some years ago describing the state of Indian courts. There was concern that I had crossed that delicate line between what you can say without being in contempt of court. So,one of this newspapers lawyers came to see me and explained gently that although what I had written was not technically sub judice,if some judge wanted to see it that way,there could be trouble. The next week I went to meet a senior judge in the Mumbai High Court and ended up doing a piece about the persecution of the judiciary by governments across the country. Courts are starved of funds deliberately which is why they look so shambolic and why magnificent courthouses,built by the British,are falling slowly to pieces.

This week,if I attempt once more to draw attention to the judiciary,it is because an editorial in this newspaper last week has already touched on the subject. It must have been cleared by our lawyers. Besides as a responsible political columnist,I believe it would be irresponsible for me not to point out that the judiciary has of late come dangerously close to taking political sides. And,it has come dangerously close to wandering into the territory of the executive.

The political comments that worried me related to recent judgments on the Uttar Pradesh governments land acquisition policy and the Chhattisgarh governments policy to use special police officers (Salwa Judum) to counter Maoist terror. Let me quote from the two judgments. On land acquisition. In the name of globalisation,you are marginalising the people. Where is there a proliferation of terrorist activities? Because they are pushed to the walls. Why so many people are committing suicide? They are marginalised. You are not taking care of them. Poor men cannot come to the court. On Salwa Judum. People do not take up arms in organised fashion against the might of the State or against fellow human beings without rhyme or reason.

Let me clarify that I think it is wrong to acquire land from farmers to build shops and apartments for the rich. They must be paid well for their land even if it is acquired for the public good. And,I think the Salwa Judum is a bad idea because it has failed. But,I have met many terrorists in my time and would like to assure the honourable judges that they are rarely wronged farmers. The Maoists,for their part,usually do kill without rhyme or reason because they have a clearly stated plan to impose their ideology on India violently. They are known to blow up bridges,roads and schools because they do not want these things. In both judgments,what we hear from the Supreme Court is a political opinion and this is worrying.

As for wandering into the territory of the executive,there is no better example than the decision by the Supreme Court to set up a task force on black money. On account of the Government of India being in a state of rigor mortis,people like Baba Ramdev have got away with making the ludicrous claim that if Indian black money were brought back from Swiss banks,we would be a rich country. He proffers the fantastical figure of Rs 400,000 lakh crores to back his mad idea. The truth is that there is more black money in India than abroad. It is invested in real estate,sham corporations,jewellery,expensive foreign goods but mostly it goes into funding elections. Even the most corrupt of our politicians needs his black money in India. In any case why should it be easier for the Supreme Courts special task force to find this money than it has been for the Election Commission or government investigative agencies? And,is finding it not the job of the executive?

If the Supreme Court wants to help,it can do so by ensuring that the justice system works as efficiently as it does in other modern democracies. The questions it needs to answer is why more than 70 per cent of prisoners in Indian jails are under trial and why it will take more than 300 years to clear the backlog in Indian courts. If criminal trials were not endlessly delayed,it would be easier to put corrupt officials and tax evaders in jail and this would automatically bring down levels of corruption. The judiciary would do well to put its own house in order.

The Supreme Court could begin by asking why the poor man is denied access to the justice system. And,then ponder over whether it is not because of this that so many young Indians resort to guns and violence.

Follow Tavleen Singh on Twitter @ tavleen_singh