CHENNAI: A section of lawyers practicing in Madras High Court upped the ante against Supreme Court Collegium’s recent recommendation to appoint advocate Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri as a judge of the Madras HC saying that she is “unfit” for the position as her “regressive views” on a minority community are “antithetical” to the Constitution.
The lawyers shot off a memorandum to President Droupadi Murmu seeking her to return the file recommending the name of Victoria Gowri for elevation as a judge and seek clarification as to how a person who has spread hate speech against our country’s minorities has been recommended to a high constitutional office of a judge of a High Court.
“Gowri’s regressive views are completely antithetical to the foundational Constitutional values and reflect her deep-rooted religious bigotry making her unfit to be appointed as a High Court judge,” the lawyers said.
They referred to Gowri’s two interviews on a Youtube channel hosted by RSS. In one of the interviews -more threat to national security and peace? Jihad or Christian Missionary?- uploaded on February 27, 2018, she launched a shocking, distasteful diatribe against Christians stating that like Islam is green terror, Christianity is white terror, the lawyers noted.
In the second interview, captioned Cultural genocide by Christian missionaries in Bharat-Victoria Gowri, she refers to “the nefarious activity of the Roman Catholics” and proclaims that Bharatanatyam should not be danced for Christian songs, the memorandum stated, adding the statements “amount to hate speech likely to spread and incite communal discord/violence.”
It also referred to an article published in RSS mouthpiece- Organiser- on religious conversions.
The memorandum was signed by twenty-two lawyers including senior advocates including NGR Prasad, R Vaigai, Anna Mathew, D Nagasaila, V Suresh, T Mohan and Sudha Ramalingam.
Quoting the United Nation’s initiatives against hate speech, the signatories said, “It is therefore ironical that the Collegium should recommend a person who has propelled her career by fomenting hatred through her public utterances. This recommendation will be viewed as nothing but a betrayal of the Indian Constitution and the global commitment to eradicate hate speech.”
They said an impartial and independent judiciary is sine qua non of democracy, the lawyers said a judge must discharge her Constitutional responsibility without fear or favour, uninfluenced by predispositions and prejudices that inhibit the impartial administration of justice.
In the context of Gowri’s utterances, can any litigant belonging to the Muslim or Christian community ever hope to get justice in her court if she becomes a judge, they queried.
In a similar memorandum sent to the Supreme Court Collegium members including the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, the lawyers stated that it is extremely critical at this juncture to safeguard the institution from being weakened by its own administrative action and sought recalling the recommendation.