Law & judiciary: More sloganeering, less vision – Part II

Fortunately, the judiciary appears to have woken up from its listlessness, releasing all Tablighis who were maligned

India comes up with impressive slogans like Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas (universal cooperation and universal prosperity) and Atma Nirbhar Bharat (self-reliant India). The words are there. The intent appears missing. This is because the very bedrock of civilised society – the judiciary -- is sought to be marginalised.

Little focus on laws

Just look at the chart in the Economic Survey 2021. Out of 128 countries, India ranked 115 on accessibility and affordability of civil justice. Its ranking on delays and enforceability were equally terrible. Clearly, the common citizen was the most abused.

Still, India managed to come out with a reasonably better overall ranking of 69 possibly because large companies could manage to get their problems redressed. Yet, even large companies like Dewas Multimedia, Vodafone, and Vedanta had to approach international courts – and won the cases – against decisions in India that they considered unfair. India now plans to challenge all the three cases.

Unfortunately, successive governments in India have ignored spending on each of the three pillars on which any progressive society rests -- education, health and the rule of law.

Instead, successive governments have even attempted using extra-judicial means.

Pitting people against people

One example was promoting the Salwa Judum -- a move to arm citizens and train them to fight against armed Naxalites. This move was finally abandoned when the Supreme Court passed some stinging strictures against that government. Law and order should not be outsourced to third parties, said the court.

Even this government has attempted promoting extra-judicial measures.

For instance, it has attempted to give free rein to gau-rakshaks (literally cow protectors) to carry out a political agenda of not permitting cow slaughter. The loss to the economy and to marginal farmers who owned cattle is immense. The government has not yet made any provision to compensate them for their losses.

Another possible instance was when the Army – which normally does not ever get into proposing social reform -- recommended creating a similar Salwa Judum movement. A paper put up by the Army encouraged unemployed youth to be inducted into the Army for a short-term training course. The Army proposal suggested that this would help in giving them a sense of discipline. Public furore followed. Fortunately, the proposal was quietly buried.

Then, just recently, the home ministry proposed involving citizens to report on misuse of social media and other anti-social crimes. The ‘circular’ said that such an experiment would “be piloted in Jammu and Kashmir and Tripura”, where volunteers would “flag and report child sexual abuse, rape, terrorism, ‘radicalisation’ and ‘antinational’” activities. The government was effectively trying to pit citizen against citizen.

This is certainly not the rule of law.

Disdain for laws

The sheer disdain successive governments have shown towards the rule of law can also be seen in the poor expenditure on this front compared to most progressive countries.

The legislature was emboldened in 1970 when Indira Gandhi, former Prime Minister, abolished privy purses. That was a constitutional guarantee to the erstwhile princes who agreed to join the Union of India post-Independence. When Mrs Gandhi lost the case in 1969, she waited. Then, in 1970, fresh from her triumph in the Bangladesh war, and armed with the huge political clout she needed, she changed the composition of judges in the Supreme Court. She then proposed the motion once again to abolish privy purses, won the case, and the rest is history.

India learnt to use laws to break laws.

As Indira Jaising, noted lawyer, once pointed out, when you use the law to break laws, you push an entire country towards lawlessness.

The legislature’s appetite for retrospective laws too grew. Its willingness to promote contentious laws increased. It amended the Foreign Currency Regulations Act (FCRA) in March 2018, allowing political parties to receive foreign funds with no questions asked, with retrospective effect for 42 years. Other contentious laws are Aadhaar, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the linking of PAN cards to Aadhaar. Together, they have pushed India to the brink of a constitutional crisis. Another controversial move is to allow remote voting from anywhere. That could further extend bogus Aadhaar cards to a manipulation of electoral rolls at a scale that cannot be imagined.

The judiciary stirs

Fortunately, the judiciary appears to have woken up from its listlessness. It released all the Tablighis who were maligned – without proof for various crimes. It recently threw out the police case for arresting the 22-year-old Disha Ravi.

After all, law remains the last bulwark for any civilised society. If that bulwark collapses, the floodgates will also break. Some of the disturbing signs of this breakdown will be discussed in the next article.