Legal profession demands that lawyers be opportunists and convenient twisters of logic. Opportunism done in excess attracts opprobrium. Reactions of legal luminaries to the outcome of the harassment charge against the CJI are a testimony to this.
In sexual harassment cases, law demands that anonymity of the complainant has to be ensured. The case needs to be concluded as speedily as possible so that agony for both the complainant and the accused is not extended over torturous time. But Prashant Bhushan has taken exception to in-camera proceedings and the 'haste' in completion. He complains, "An in-house committee of the CJI's colleagues which held informal proceedings in-camera without allowing the complainant a lawyer or a support person has given a hasty clean chit to the CJI."
Sanjay Hegde has contested Justice Bobde who is next only to the CJI in seniority, heading the panel that enquired into the allegation. Why? The reasoning is as strange as it can get. "He will in all probability be the next CJI. Two of his immediate predecessors have come under public scrutiny of an unwelcome kind. The court has now chosen a status quoist denial over a serious exploration of the truth , regardless of risk. How will its actions be seen?" The insinuation is that Bobde is trying to protect himself against a possible complaint against him when he becomes the CJI. Activists are working overtime preparing affidavits against whoever becomes the next CJI?
Dushyant Dave makes a snide appeal to other judges of the Supreme Court. "Will the honourable judges stand up as the collective conscience of the Supreme Court?", he wants to know. Looking for a split in the court?
When eminent lawyers are keen on destroying the sanctity of courts in their attempts to denigrate a judge, the helpless citizen becomes more concerned about the future of the country.
In sexual harassment cases, law demands that anonymity of the complainant has to be ensured. The case needs to be concluded as speedily as possible so that agony for both the complainant and the accused is not extended over torturous time. But Prashant Bhushan has taken exception to in-camera proceedings and the 'haste' in completion. He complains, "An in-house committee of the CJI's colleagues which held informal proceedings in-camera without allowing the complainant a lawyer or a support person has given a hasty clean chit to the CJI."
Sanjay Hegde has contested Justice Bobde who is next only to the CJI in seniority, heading the panel that enquired into the allegation. Why? The reasoning is as strange as it can get. "He will in all probability be the next CJI. Two of his immediate predecessors have come under public scrutiny of an unwelcome kind. The court has now chosen a status quoist denial over a serious exploration of the truth , regardless of risk. How will its actions be seen?" The insinuation is that Bobde is trying to protect himself against a possible complaint against him when he becomes the CJI. Activists are working overtime preparing affidavits against whoever becomes the next CJI?
Dushyant Dave makes a snide appeal to other judges of the Supreme Court. "Will the honourable judges stand up as the collective conscience of the Supreme Court?", he wants to know. Looking for a split in the court?
When eminent lawyers are keen on destroying the sanctity of courts in their attempts to denigrate a judge, the helpless citizen becomes more concerned about the future of the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment