One of the biggest failures of this govt is the institutional meddling,pressure tactics and compromises that have plagued them. Indian judiciary is under fire in the last 1+ year and has been criticised for its decisions, many seen as supportive for the govt leading to the rebellion of the 4 judges.
Now with one of the rebel judges as CJI, again there are many questioning the decisions. Both the govt and opposition are criticising the decision to drop the 2 approved judges and replaced with younger judges,
My view is contrary to most views -
1. Clearly the SC is under immense pressure from the govt even under the new CJI as are other institutions. Going on an open offensive against the govt is disastrous and will undermine both the executive and judiciary. Particularly after the open rebellion in which the current CJI was also part of the 4 judges. Hence this is ruled out. You cannot keep rebelling against all decisions and it will become ineffective like it happened for Kejriwal.
2. In the rafale case, despite the petitioners being upset, I think it was a brilliant judgement. Based on the various representations, the judges ruled that the price issue was out of scope for them and very cleverly they inserted the point on how the CAG has already audited the deal and presented to PAC and reviewed with them as mentioned in the sealed cover by govt. Everyone including the judges know this govt has been hiding behind the secrecy clause and no such report was reviewed by PAC.
3. In short, the so called rafale acquittal turned into a conviction in front of the public due to this misrepresentation in the sealed cover leading to massive outcry. Brilliant move without open rebellion.
4. CBI Chief Alok Verma case - in this case, the judges ruled that there is a prima facie evidence against him based on reports submitted but the procedure followed to remove him was wrong and hence reinstated him with curtailed powers. Again it is correct. SC can only decide based on the material presented to them. So if the CVC report against Alok Verma is cooked up, there is no way for SC to know it. And knowing that both cbi directors were fighting, reinstating Alok Verma with full powers would have riled the govt, and with 17 days to retirement, it is correct to say - don't take any policy decisions at this stage.
5. CJI recused himself and asked justice Sikri to be part of the selection panel to decide on the next steps on CBI director. Now the issue is why did Sikri vote to remove the CBI director? Again it is correct. If the SC judges found that the prima facie evidence exists against Alok Verma, justice Sikri had no choice but to support his removal. Even if these charges are politically motivated and deliberately hoisted on the CBI director. This has to be raised in the public domain and fought politically as the opposition is doing. And by publicly refusing the govt offered position of common wealth seat, he has sent the right message, on judificiary independence. And this public message is enough for the opposition and media to pin the govt to the wall. brilliant move again,
6. Ram Mandir case - by taking time and constituting a 5 judge bench, the CJI has done the right thing instead of rushing the case under pressure by the govt.
7. Judges approved by earlier collegium meeting in Dec, have been removed subsequently in the Jan meeting. Based on some new information, this decision has been taken. My view - the govt must have influenced the earlier 2 judges and hence the collegium removed them and replaced with 2 Nuetral judges. The way the govt is conducting a massive media campaign against this decision by asking the retired judges and bar council to question openly, only proves the collegum decision is correct.
In short, this CJI is managing the govt and check mating them brilliantly at every level without open rebellion. It will be interesting to see how this plays out leading into the election. And most of the commentators are analysing this wrongly by criticing the CJI and the collegium !
Now with one of the rebel judges as CJI, again there are many questioning the decisions. Both the govt and opposition are criticising the decision to drop the 2 approved judges and replaced with younger judges,
My view is contrary to most views -
1. Clearly the SC is under immense pressure from the govt even under the new CJI as are other institutions. Going on an open offensive against the govt is disastrous and will undermine both the executive and judiciary. Particularly after the open rebellion in which the current CJI was also part of the 4 judges. Hence this is ruled out. You cannot keep rebelling against all decisions and it will become ineffective like it happened for Kejriwal.
2. In the rafale case, despite the petitioners being upset, I think it was a brilliant judgement. Based on the various representations, the judges ruled that the price issue was out of scope for them and very cleverly they inserted the point on how the CAG has already audited the deal and presented to PAC and reviewed with them as mentioned in the sealed cover by govt. Everyone including the judges know this govt has been hiding behind the secrecy clause and no such report was reviewed by PAC.
3. In short, the so called rafale acquittal turned into a conviction in front of the public due to this misrepresentation in the sealed cover leading to massive outcry. Brilliant move without open rebellion.
4. CBI Chief Alok Verma case - in this case, the judges ruled that there is a prima facie evidence against him based on reports submitted but the procedure followed to remove him was wrong and hence reinstated him with curtailed powers. Again it is correct. SC can only decide based on the material presented to them. So if the CVC report against Alok Verma is cooked up, there is no way for SC to know it. And knowing that both cbi directors were fighting, reinstating Alok Verma with full powers would have riled the govt, and with 17 days to retirement, it is correct to say - don't take any policy decisions at this stage.
5. CJI recused himself and asked justice Sikri to be part of the selection panel to decide on the next steps on CBI director. Now the issue is why did Sikri vote to remove the CBI director? Again it is correct. If the SC judges found that the prima facie evidence exists against Alok Verma, justice Sikri had no choice but to support his removal. Even if these charges are politically motivated and deliberately hoisted on the CBI director. This has to be raised in the public domain and fought politically as the opposition is doing. And by publicly refusing the govt offered position of common wealth seat, he has sent the right message, on judificiary independence. And this public message is enough for the opposition and media to pin the govt to the wall. brilliant move again,
6. Ram Mandir case - by taking time and constituting a 5 judge bench, the CJI has done the right thing instead of rushing the case under pressure by the govt.
7. Judges approved by earlier collegium meeting in Dec, have been removed subsequently in the Jan meeting. Based on some new information, this decision has been taken. My view - the govt must have influenced the earlier 2 judges and hence the collegium removed them and replaced with 2 Nuetral judges. The way the govt is conducting a massive media campaign against this decision by asking the retired judges and bar council to question openly, only proves the collegum decision is correct.
In short, this CJI is managing the govt and check mating them brilliantly at every level without open rebellion. It will be interesting to see how this plays out leading into the election. And most of the commentators are analysing this wrongly by criticing the CJI and the collegium !
