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.
However, damage has been done to the court and to the government. Questions are now being asked about multiple other such assignments of cases.
Until Misra clears the air and makes institutional changes to how cases are assigned, such suspicions are not going away, and unless there is an open, swift and independent investigation of Loya’s death, suspicions about that will not subside either.
India’s judicial system is hardly the best in the world. It is overworked, choked by hundreds of long-running or unnecessary cases and yes, as any businessman will tell you, the lower judiciary is perhaps open to a spot of bribery or a touch of manipulation.
However, it has long been assumed that at least the higher judiciary is independent and clean. For investors and citizens alike, the presence of a Supreme Court that can be trusted made up for myriad other failings of the Indian state. Restoring that faith should be an urgent priority.
Mihir Sharma is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was a columnist for the Indian Express and the Business Standard. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
In November last year, a man struck a woman with a steel bar and killed her outside a hospital in China’s Fujian Province. Later, he justified his actions to the police by saying that he attacked her because she was small and alone, and he was venting his anger after a dispute with a colleague. To the casual observer, it could be seen as another case of an angry man gone mad for a moment, but on closer inspection, it reflects the sad side of a society long brutalized by violent political struggles triggered by crude Leninism and Maoism. Starting
If social media interaction is any yardstick, India remained one of the top countries for Taiwan last year. President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has on several occasions expressed enthusiasm to strengthen cooperation with India, one of the 18 target nations in her administration’s New Southbound Policy. The past year was instrumental in fostering Taiwan-India ties and will be remembered for accelerated momentum in bilateral relations. However, most of it has been confined to civil society circles. Even though Taiwan launched its southbound policy in 2016, the potential of Taiwan-India engagement remains underutilized. It is crucial to identify what is obstructing greater momentum
In terms of the economic outlook for the semiconductor industry, Taiwan has outperformed the rest of the world for three consecutive years. This is quite rare. In addition, Taiwan has been playing an important role in the US-China technology dispute, and both want Taiwan on their side, reflecting the remaking of the nation’s semiconductor industry. Under the leadership of — above all — Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the industry as a whole has shifted from a focus on capacity to a focus on quality, as companies now have to be able to provide integration of hardware and software, as well as
The US last week took action to remove most of the diplomatic red tape around US-Taiwan relations. While there have been adjustments in State Department “Guidelines on Relations with Taiwan” and other guidance before, no administration has ever so thoroughly dispensed with them. It is a step in the right direction. Of course, when there is a policy of formally recognizing one government (the People’s Republic of China or PRC) and not another (the Republic of China or ROC), officials from the top of government down need a systematic way of operationalizing the distinction. They cannot just make it up as