|
Dear Chandan
*****Why can't you BK? Is it because you know something that the writer
does not, or is it that you find Chawla's explanations inadequate or
unconvincing?
At the very beginning I complimented the author for his brilliant article.
Chawla is familiar with the working of the present day judiciary of India and he
would have better grasp of certain things than you or I do. Yet I would
hold that both of you're forgetting certain fundamental aspects of democracy. I
explained this already and now I find I've to do it again.
Never mind!
"...that courts are answerable to none and that they can act irresponsibly
and have no accountability and act with impunity and then let themselves be
manipulated by the wheeling-dealing of crooked lawyers and external
influences."
As you know the judges are like government servants; their work is
supervised and they are subject to discipline like any
other government servant. However, as judges they enjoy certain privileges,
say in the conduct of their cases while their social life is somewhat restricted
so that they cannot be influenced by external factors. You may be familiar with
the _expression_ "Independence of the judiciary." There can be disciplinary
action againt a judge if the judge is found to be failing in his duties or even
for moral turpitude. So it is just nonsense that they can act irresponsibly and
act with impunity. I also don't think that an upright judge would willingly
subject himself to wheeling-dealing by crooked lawyers etc.
I also stated that unlike top civil servants a judge's work is reviewed
constantly by a world of lawyers, judges at all levels, jurists and members
of the public. When cases are appealed, the superior judges point out errors if
there is any. Judges' promotion largely depends on their performance. If a
judge is slow in his work it is noticed not only by the superior judges but also
by members of the public. No other public servant is subject to such universal
scrutiny of his/her performance and even his/her personal behaviour.
Then, in a democratic system the Minister at the top is accountable to the
public at large through parliament for all mattters connected with law and
justice. It is no credit to the ruling party when the opposition or any citizen
criticises the government for slow disposal of cases. It is because of this
criticism that these FTCs are being experimented with.Now as you possibly
know the lower courts are hellish places, and it is largely here that the
wheeling-dealing takes place. I explained that as a social
phenomenon.
In the High Courts and in the Supreme Court of India corruption is less.
The Judges of the High Court and Supreme Court leave the mundane things to a
lower judge, the paper work, arranging the sessions, fixing dates of
hearing,etc Therefore the wheeling and dealing is minimal in the higher
judiciary.
*****Why I ask is because anyone can dismiss anything with the air of an
expert. It is an arrogant desi trait. But it could be convincing only if a case
is made with a persuasive explanation or argument.
If someone is adamantine I suppose persuasion cannot prevail. Because
persuasion is not always by reason. Many public leaders excel rather by rhetoric
than substance. People use expressions loosely. Take for example, the
_expression_ "ones courage of conviction." Do I need explain further? Now about
desi trait. I confess I've not been able to atttain a complete metamorphosis in
foreign land. And argument? Argument does not win intellectual victory; it
breeds animosity and when mere words fail, people take to fisticuff. And that
happens amongst civilised people and even in pardesh. People should
discuss and debate, but not argue, and bad, strong language, never!
*****Wrong inference.
This is not an inference. What I stated was an ideal. I am afraid
you've not done your homework. Delay in settling cases is not an one-sided
matter. It is team work really.Limits are set and they are enforceable. A judge
has the right to dismiss a case if a lawyer tries to manipulate things. Human
ingenuity overcomes all. I would give an example. In the fifties an illegal
immigrant from India was prosecuted. But the prosecution did not win. Since then
practically after every important case, the immigration rules have been
hardened, reviewed and amended. Has illegal immigration ever stopped?
*****We need not bother much about the Best Bakery case as the judge was
unable to convict the guilty persons because of poor police work and that he did
not leave room for appeal.
We need not because the judge had not enough evidence to go
by. Possibly that is why he did not leave room for appeal. In any
case, Chawla stated that the case can go for a revision at the High Court. That
is why I didn't want to prolong the discussion. I can spend another hour in
discussing this but would you like it?
***** It does not take a genius to see this whole thing was rigged to
arrive at pre-determined outcome. And we should not be concerned about it?
I am glad that you have fairly grasped how the police and the judiciary
function in tendem as it were. Best Bakery is no ordinary case but to accuse the
judge straightway without having background knowledge about the procedures
involved. This is something like judgments by the press.Appeal judges say that
the appellate court is not the best court. I am not going into these niceties in
order to save time.
Now I would like to wind up. If our citizens are as well informed as
you're and do something more than our humble contribution to Assam
Net, our deshi democracy could march along with foreign democracy with
heads held high. That is what NDB meant: increasing awareness
and do something positive.We forget that eternal vigilance is the
price of liberty.
Bhuban
.Bhuban
|
_______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [email protected] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
