Statement by Dr. Abhishek Singhvi, MP, National Spokesperson & CWC Member

The Modi Government’s approach to the judiciary smacks of ‘3I’ (III) and equally the ‘3S’ Approach. Intimidation, Interference and Influence: These are unfortunately the three notorious spikes of the Modi Government’s approach to the judiciary. BJP is equally on a spree to Sabotage, Subjugate, and Subvert the judiciary.

For years now, it is the worst kept secret of legal circles that this control freak, micro management and dossier loving sarkar and ruling party has indulged in various manipulative tactics qua the most trusted third organ of governance. It has:

a) excessively but selectively delayed judicial appointment proposals both to the High Courts and to the Supreme Court, Justice Querishi being only one out of many such names; b) it has arbitrarily bifurcated approved judicial appointees’ lists to the higher judiciary, again selectively, to allow some from the original common list to be appointed quickly, while selectively appointing others after a considerable time lag. c) it has inaugurated an ambiance of fear, trepidation, anxiety and hesitation in the judicial sector by the misuse of dossier raj and oblique insinuations based thereupon; d) it has tried to prevail upon judicial collegia, understandably keen to fill ever increasing vacancies, to do punitive transfers of judicial authorities perceived as inconvenient; e) it has attempted illegally and unfairly to interfere, whenever it can and whenever it deems necessary as per its own narrow, party and ideological thinking, with judges and the judiciary in general and the legal process. f) it has attempted to install a section of judicial personnel vetted by it and its supporters, on impermissible tests of loyalty, ideology and commitment to itself.

Interference: In this long, non-exhaustive list of manipulative tactics, comes a clear example from Karnataka which is symptomatic of this extremely serious malaise. A sitting, Single Judge of that Court has unequivocally said:

“a sitting judge told me that ”he had received a call from Delhi (name not disclosed)”. ”The person from Delhi asked about me, he said. I told him that I am not affiliated to any party,”. “He said the ADGP is from north India and he is powerful,” the HC judge said, adding that a reference was also made by the sitting judge to the transfer of another judge. Justice Sandesh also said that he had reported the perceived threat to the authorities concerned. It affects the independence of the judiciary and amounts to interference with the dispensation of justice, he said.

Intimidation: When a bench of the Supreme Court made strong and pertinent observations regarding the reckless conduct of a BJP Spokesperson and the arrogance displayed by her, we saw the three-pronged attack that has become an all too familiar tool of the ruling dispensation. (1) Savage and faceless trolls spewed fake news and propaganda, (2) An orchestrated letter by “Intellectuals” was dispatched& (3) One-sided, and even contemptuous, reporting by sections of the Godi media.

The Bar, as well as the vast silent majority, stood behind the learned bench for their timely intervention that saved a situation from being exacerbated. However, by attempting to intimidate the Supreme Court, these actors unwittingly exposed the perpetrators and beneficiaries of the violence.

The BJP appears to have empowered its goons with Audacity, Authority, and reckless over Adventurism to intimidate judges.

Influence: The entire nation is following the story of how a fact checker was jailed. What was more surprising was how, for the first time in the history of their offices, the senior law officers used their talents effectively in the defence of those whose illegal conduct had been exposed by the fact checker.

In another development on July 10, the Advocates’ Association of Bombay High Court at Aurangabad addressed a letter to Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju taking objection to the delays in clearing appointment of judges to the Bombay High Court. The representation has called upon the members of bar associations of all benches of the High Court to initiate protest against the delay in appointing High Court judges, until the Central government acts upon the collegium recommendations at the earliest. The letter specifically highlighted names of nine lawyers whose appointment as judges were recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium in February 2022 but are yet to be cleared.

Lastly, the judgement of the SC yesterday regarding bail needs to be underlined. We have seen, over the last 7 years, egregious executive action, on flimsy grounds, invoking usually inapplicable provisions like sedition, UAPA etc. The ruling party governments, both at the centre and in many states, have been the most frequent defaulter in this regard. Often, they are fully aware of the abuse of legal provisions they are indulging in but equally apply the principle that the process is the punishment and the end result be damned. Tardiness or hesitation of courts through bail intervention in this regard exacerbates the problem.

Hence the relevance of the SC’s clear observation that lack of speed in dealing with bails as also hesitation or obstruction in their grant, would make India look “like a police state”. The Congress believes that this is much needed guidance from the apex court, especially where the ruling dispensation seeks to rule through fear, control through coercion.

We the Congress Party intend, using due process of law, in accordance with the Constitution and obviously subject to due legislative process in Congress-ruled states, to create in the near future legislative enactments encapsulating, in letter and spirit, as many as possible of the SC guidelines through appropriate state amendments. Tuesday, July 12, 2022