Sun, Jan 21, 2018 - Page 7 News List

Supreme Court judges accuse India’s chief justice of corruption

By Mihir Sharma  /  Bloomberg View

Even by the standards of a country where something unexpected happens every minute, the scene last week at India’s Supreme Court was startling.

India’s top judges are invariably reticent; for example by shying away from any public display of political affiliations. However, the four most senior judges of the court last week held a news conference together, an unprecedented act.

They then accused their boss, Indian Chief Justice Dipak Misra, of undermining the Supreme Court — the one institution in the nation that many fondly thought was insulated from corruption or political interference.

Democracy might not survive, the judges said.

Let us get one thing straight: These judges are not malcontents or habitual dissenters. Some of them lean conservative, others liberal. One of them is due to take over as chief justice later this year, when Misra retires — unlike in the US, where US Supreme Court judges serve for life, in India they have a clear exit date.

The four justices leveled some disturbing allegations at Misra.

India’s chief justice really has only one unique power: the ability to decide which set of judges hears which case.

Given that India’s Supreme Court has dozens of judges — another difference from the US, which famously has only nine — this power is far from meaningless. You could, theoretically, encourage certain outcomes by handing cases over to certain judges, if you knew in advance their sympathies and predispositions.

That is exactly what the four justices at the news conference said they feared.

“There have been instances where cases having far-reaching consequences for the nation and the institution have been assigned by the chief justices of this court selectively to the benches ‘of their preference’ without any rational basis for such assignment,” they said.

The judges referred obliquely to at least one such case: the examination of whether there was anything suspicious about the 2014 death of Justice BH Loya, who was trying a murder case against Amit Shah, who has since arguably become India’s second-most powerful man.

Shah is president of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which runs the federal government and most of the states, and he has long been Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s right-hand man.

The magazine Caravan last month broke a story rasing some unsettling questions about the circumstances surrounding Loya’s death — a death which coincidentally cleared the way for the dismissal of the murder charge against Shah.

When asked about the controversy early last month, Shah, who has denied any wrongdoing, said the law would “take its own course.”

The Supreme Court was forced to take notice of the problem; after all, a judge had died, but the four judges speaking out apparently believed that a more senior bench of their fellows should have been assigned to the question than the one decided on by Misra.

Hours after the latter turned down their request that he reconsider, they called their news conference.

The possibility of a subversion of justice — in a case involving a dead judge and powerful politicians — would be deeply troubling if true. Such things happen in countries without a real judiciary or democratic institutions. It is not how things are meant to be done in India.

On Monday, it looked like the situation had returned to normal; Supreme Court justices do not go on strike — at least, not yet. The BJP brought forward the young son of the dead judge who said, while surrounded by a battery of lawyers, that he no longer supported an investigation into his father’s death.

This story has been viewed 2288 times.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top