In a hard-hitting interview about the present differences between the Supreme Court on the one hand and the executive and the legislature on the other, a former member of Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s cabinet says the Supreme Court should behave as if “it’s at war with the executive in defence of the constitution”. Arun Shourie says: “The defence must be comprehensive, across the board, it must be unrelenting, the judiciary must not give in on any issue at all”.
Shourie, who is also a former editor of the Indian Express and a prolific author, says that the recent comments made by the law minister, about judges and the Supreme Court collegium, and by the vice president, about the primacy and supremacy of parliament over the Constitution, do not simply reflect the difference of opinion over how judges are chosen but constitute “a concerted attack on the judiciary” which is “deliberate and well-thought through”. Shourie says this is not just an attack on judges but an attempt “to denigrate” the Supreme Court, a fundamental and critical part of our Constitution. He says the aim is to lower the image and standing of the Supreme Court in the eyes of the Indian people.
Shourie said that the attack on the Supreme Court is part of the “totalitarian character of the government”. It is, he explained, seeking “total control” over everything.
If Vajpayee were alive today, the former minister continued, he would be deeply distressed by the government’s treatment of the Supreme Court. He also said if L.K. Advani were to speak out, he would share the same distress. Both gentlemen, Shourie said, had been sharply critical of Indira Gandhi when she sought a committed judiciary and superceded judges to appoint Justice Ray as chief justice or to ensure Justice Khanna never got the top job.
In the interview, Shourie also discusses at length the different ways in which the judiciary has failed to help its own cause. The issues he discusses are instances when the judiciary failed to ensure that its directions and judgements were implemented, when judges accepted post-retirement jobs, when sitting Supreme Court judges publicly and sycophantically praised the prime minister, or when, as he put it, double standards prevail in their judgements. The example he quoted was the difference in treatment between Siddique Kappan and Arnab Goswami over the issue of bail.
A large part of this interview is about what Shourie believes the court must do to defend itself and the Constitution. He said, first, they “should see the pattern of what is being done” and select and schedule cases after assessing the significance of the case and how it would impact on our Constitution or democracy or elections.
Next, Shourie said the Supreme Court must show its seriousness in ensuring its judgements are adhered to by monitoring the response and punishing with contempt of court when those judgements are ignored or violated.
