Counter the challenges to reclaim civilisational heritage
Taking off the blindfold from the eyes of the goddess and replacing the sword with a scale obviously isn’t enough to get rid off the lingering colonial vestiges. Brilliant and restless (soon-to-be ex) CJI Chandrachud decided demolish in one fell swoop the grand, but to his mind no longer relevant, edifice of judiciary erected by the British rulers.
The ground had been cleared earlier by the Parliament discarding the IPC, Criminal Procedure Code and the time-tested Indian Evidence Act. The renaming was not just a sleight of hand but removing the foreign legal squatters from the land owned by independent India. It was left to the legal luminary presiding over the apex court to deal the final blow.
By now, the controversial confession how DY Chandrachud had sought divine guidance/intervention when confusion clouded his mind before delivering the judgment on the Ram janmabhoomi case has been discussed threadbare and there is no need to dwell on details. Ditto the Ganesh puja jointly with the PM in his house. What needs to be sharply focused on is the aftershocks that will continue to imperil the remaining structure and what the implications are for victims and litigants who seek justice.
The message is loud and clear. Natural justice be damned, let the ‘Rule of Law’ based on alien concept of separation of powers be replaced with nyaya guided by eternal values of sanatana dharma and in conformity with swadeshi civilisational values. The only problem in the practice of this precept is that India is a pluralistic society, a land of many religions. There is no consensus about what our core civilisational values are.
Seeking divine guidance by the person occupying the highest position in the Supreme Court has other hazards. If divine guiding light is dazzling can it not blind the now open eyes of the goddess sculpted in stone? And, how is the balance struck if different judges experience illuminating visions gifted by contending deities? There is a long history of warring Gods. Not all debates have been settled logically.
Swords and scimitars have clashed leaving the soil soaked in blood. It isn’t surprising at all that those who haven’t been privileged to personal confidential communication with immortals are bewildered by Chandrachud’s disclosures. The issue impinges on the lives of more than a billion-and-half Indians and transcends the spiritual strivings and faith of an individual.
Law, it has been famously observed—we hasten to add in a non Indian context—is an ass. Other animals like kangaroos, one is told, hold courts dispensing swift devastatingly partisan judgment. ‘Matsya Nyaya’ in Indic tradition recognises the reality of the larger fish devouring the smaller in size. The hungry wolf who devoured the lamb pleading innocence was silenced by the verdict of the ravenous judge sitting in its own cause burdening him with the alleged guilt of its parent.
Justice Chandrachud had aroused great expectations at the time of his elevation. He roared like a lion in obiter dicta but crucial judgments sounded like mews of a wise cat who preferred to purr. His flashes of temper and conduct as Master of the Rolls left his admirers confused and disappointed. His worry about how history will judge him isn’t our concern. As he makes way for his successor he has perhaps rendered unwittingly his final service to the people of India forcing us to think of our own relationship with religion, law and science.
None can deny that in prehistoric times it was region that spawned law and science. But across millennia the ways of priest-oracle-shaman and the scientist-empirical observer eschewing blind faith have parted. Law hasn’t been able to cut off the umbilical chord. The tug of war between ‘Laws of God’ and ‘Manmade Laws’ continues to rage unabated. Societies are torn asunder by sectarian strife.
The role of religion in personal life and in public domain is certainly not easy to reconcile. Translating dharma literally as religion complicates matters more. The Hindus have followed different religious paths without relying on any single book laying down the commandments. This is what differentiates Hindus from the followers of Abrahamic religion.
Path-breaking scientific discoveries were made in this land because there was no church to fetter the scientists challenging dogma. In ancient India dharma was the protector of the weak, the check on the ruler. It encompassed the concept of welfare of the people and duty of the individual. Indians were encouraged by enlightened seers to ‘know themselves’ and become their own lamps as seekers of truth.
It’s time we woke up to the challenges that confront us and shared the struggle to reclaim our civilisational heritage. Divine revelations experienced by individuals shared conveniently at opportune moments can’t deliver anyone from evil.
Pushpesh Pant
Former professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
pushpeshpant@gmail.com