Avoid ‘parallel debate’ on Pegasus issue, says SC

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday took exception to a “parallel debate” by petitioners outside the courts on the alleged surveillance of Indian citizens with the Israeli Pegasus spyware, saying if they are using the legal system they must have faith in it.

Even as the Union government received time till Monday to respond to a clutch of petitions demanding a court-monitored independent investigation into the alleged snooping, the top court asked petitioners to refrain from debating the issue on public platforms while it was adjudicating the matter.

“Any of the petitioners who is interested in this matter and is saying things in the newspapers, we expect they will answer our queries through a proper channel in the court hall and not outside. We expect petitioners to understand there will be a debate in the court. Questions will be asked. They must have faith in the system. But this parallel debate, parallel discussion..” the bench, headed by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana told the counsel for the petitioners. “There must be some discipline. We asked some questions. There is an adjudication process. Sometimes it may be inconvenient to you and sometimes convenient but that is how this process is. Both sides have to face the music. If they want to bring something to our notice, they should file those documents here,” added the bench, which also comprised justices Vineet Saran and Surya Kant.

CJI Ramana said that it was a message from all the three judges on the bench to the petitioners, which included advocate ML Sharma; former union minister Yashwant Sinha, Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas; the Editors Guild of India (EGI); journalists N Ram and Sashi Kumar; journalists Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Rupesh Kumar Singh, Ipshita Shatakshi, SNM Abdi, and Prem Shankar Jha; and civil rights activists Jagdeep S

Chhokar and Narendra Mishra.

At this point, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said: “When I was appearing for Mr N Ram last time, the court had asked me why Indians were not there in the order of the California court although the petition mentioned it. He was severely trolled for it.”

The CJI replied: “This is the problem of taking one line out of context. But debates must not cross the limit. If they are using the system, they should have faith in the system. This is the message from all of us.”

Sibal agreed that petitioners should not make any kind of public statements when their petitions were being heard by the bench.

Meanwhile, solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, said that he will need some time to get instructions on the matter from the government.

“I have received most of the petitions. Let me get instructions from the government and come back,” he submitted.

The court accepted this request and fixed the matter for Monday next. “We will take a call (on issuance of notice) on Monday,” remarked the CJI. Lawyers for the petitioners also got the liberty to file additional documents in the case.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing former RSS ideologue and political activist KN Govindacharya, informed the bench that Govindacharya has also moved court. Singh pointed out that Govindacharya came to the court in 2019 for an investigation into the alleged surveillance by Pegasus but his plea was not entertained.

The court agreed to hear Govindacharya’s petition on Monday.

Expect petitioners to understand there will be a debate in the court. They must have faith in the system