The Congress presidential elections are finally over. It was always a 'chronicle of the results foretold'. Mallikarjun Kharge's installation didn't cause any surprise, nor can it be truthfully told that it has enthused the party rank and file. Venerable Kharge at 82 belongs to a generation that is Jurassic for more than half of India's population under 25.
To be fair, even his 'youthful' rival is past 60, the retirement age for the ablest of civil servants and many academics. Elected representatives and politicians have no expiry date, though. A dynasty loyalist, Kharge was literally drafted into the contest when others like Ashok Gehlot had botched up the show by jumping the gun and embarrassing the High Command by his rebellious restlessness.
Elections are looming large in many states and this side show is hardly amusing to those interested in electoral politics. The Congress doesn't appear to have a stake in Himachal Pradesh or Gujarat at the moment. Only time will tell how much of a difference can Kharge make in Karnataka where he has been an also-ran more than once.
Why waste breath though? Bouquets and brickbats, even barbed words, don't make any difference to what flounders on the stage -- everything is 'an internal matter of the party'. As the nation bids goodbye to Chief Justice of India, UU Lalit, it is reminded how a recharged Supreme Court can fill the people with hope. Working at scorching pace, the CJI, with a short tenure, demonstrated that the judiciary can push back and fight to safeguard the rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Will the next CJI, DY Chandrachud, who will be at the helm for two years, succeed in restoring the credibility of the highest court in the land and rein in a rampant executive hell-bent to ride roughshod over all other constitutional authorities and institutions? One is sick of the phrase Lakshman Rekha being repeated ad nauseam by ministers. Shouldn't this red line be clearly visible for the legislature and executive as well? Why should only the judges or the Election Commission be fettered by it?
The past few years -- seven to be precise -- have seen the Centre's assault on the federal system and the concept of separation of powers. The way central investigative and enforcement agencies have been unleashed on members of Opposition parties, dissenters and peaceful protestors is worrisome. These are in urgent need of judicial review. This is what leads us to the sad abdication of their responsibilities by recent CJIs, except the outgoing Chief Justice Lalit.
There have been disgraceful cases like former CJI Gogoi, who sat in judgment in his own cause, tearing well-established principles of natural justice and jurisprudence to shreds. To make matters worse, he lost no time in entering the Rajya Sabha after remitting office. It isn't a question of legality, but propriety and morality. Others have not fared much better. CJIs in office have showered praise on the Prime Minister, calling him a genius and god's gift. Surely, there are precedents. Justice PN Bhagwati had tarnished his till-then impeccable reputation by taking a bouquet to Indira Gandhi in her post-Emergency incarnation, but these aren't judicial precedents that must be followed.
More often than not, we have our supreme lordships thundering from the Bench, warning errant officials to respect the law, but the bolt of lightning never strikes and the men in or out of uniform continue to implement the 'rule of law' according to their whims or dictates of political masters. Recently, the Supreme Court has been constrained to tell governments in three states to take suo motu cognisance in cases of hate speech. Overlooking such offences, they have been warned, will be taken as contempt of court. We watch and wait with fingers crossed. Who will emerge victorious: the lordships of the apex court or the rogue beat constable?
Sadly, and unfortunately, some orders passed by the apex court have left the innocent citizens shaken and confused. Staying the acquittal of an accused, who had been arrested allegedly in violation of due process by the Bombay High Court, in hastily constituted Bench on Saturday, the Supreme Court has conveyed the signal that in cases with political sensitivity, it’s not always level field for all litigants. There are other cases where perpetrators of heinous crimes like rape and murder have had their sentences remitted, and even public outrage hasn't moved the Supreme Court to stay or review this decision of the executive.
One CJI spoke candidly that it is not the job of a judge to please the people. But, it's a judge's job to protect the people from predators let loose by their partisan patrons. It is equally important for their lordships to remember that it is not enough to do justice -- it must appear to be done impartially and transparently.
The country is confronted with complex challenges. It can only navigate turbulent waters when there are proper checks and balances in place.
Pushpesh Pant is former professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University. He can be reached at pushpeshpant@gmail.com.