THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The Lok Ayukta’s office on Monday issued a statement in which they defended the two judges who attended the Iftar party organised by CM Pinarayi Vijayan and dismissed the allegations against them as baseless.
The statement also defended the Lok Ayukta’s use of the phrase “rabid dog” in an open court, stating that the anti-corruption agency only wanted to highlight the inappropriate personal vilification of the judges being carried out by the petitioner and their associates on social media.
The statement explained that the Lok Ayukta had used the example of a rabid dog to illustrate their point and that the current controversy surrounding this remark was being created to divert attention away from the actual legal matter at hand. The statement further noted that the media and the petitioner’s associates had wrongly attributed the “rabid dog” label to the petitioner.
Earlier, R S Sasikumar, who petitioned the Lok Ayukta against alleged misuse of the Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund (CMDRF), had alleged that the action of the judges was inappropriate and contravened the values laid down by the Supreme Court.
The statement issued by the Lok Ayukta said the judges attended an official programme hosted by the CM on the basis of an invitation. It further said the State Human Rights Commission chairman, Kerala Administrative Tribunal chairman, and chairman of the State Commission for Backward Classes were also present in the function.”The argument that no other retired judges apart from the Lok Ayukta judges attended the Iftar party is malicious propaganda. Equally baseless is the statement that the CM and the Lok Ayukta had a private conversation,” the statement read.
The official communication further said there were precedents of judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts attending the banquets organized by the President, Prime Minister, Law Minister, Governor, Chief Minister, etc.”They don’t view it as a hindrance that the cases involving the governments are in their courts. It’s a vile thought that the judges who attend an official banquet will write a verdict favouring the government,” it said.
The office of the anti-corruption agency also brushed aside the argument that their attending the Iftar party contravened the morals laid down by the Supreme Court It said the” Restatement of Values of Judicial Life” issued by the Supreme Court was for judges in service and not for ex-judges.
Also, the term “hospitality” mentioned in the clause “judges shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from his family, close relations and friends” does not cover official banquets hosted by the CM or the governor. “The clause implies that the judges should not attend the programmes hosted by lawyers, businessmen, middlemen, private individuals, companies, foreign governments, and agencies, “the release said.
‘TOTALLY UNHEARD OF A JUDICIAL BODY ISSUING A PRESS RELEASE TO EXPLAIN ITS VERDICT’
Petitioner Sasikumar reacted that by issuing a statement the Lok Ayukta has shown that it can stoop to any level to cover up its guilt. “By saying that they have taken part in Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s Iftar party that was an official one, they have concurred with my view that it was wrong from their side,” he said. “Also, giving a delayed explanation on the “rabid dog” remark is suspicious. The Lok Ayukta could have avoided such a scenario. Instead why is it now pinning the blame on me and my friends for the remark,” he asked. He added that it was totally unheard of a judicial body issuing a press release to explain its own verdict.