Justice Jasti Chelameswar’s Eloquent Silences And Insightful Musings During His Memorable Conversation With Karan Thapar

The Harvard Club of India hosted an event on Saturday at the Constitution Club of India, New Delhi, with acclaimed journalist Mr. Karan Thapar interviewing Supreme Court Justice J. Chelameswar on the ‘Role of Judiciary in a Democracy’. As the interview progressed, it was clear that it was the sub-text, that is, the January 12 press conference by the four senior Judges of the Supreme Court, and its aftermath, that would dominate their discussion. While much has been reported about their conversation, it was the silences of Justice Chelameswar to some questions, which Karan Thapar found eloquent. As Karan Thapar remarked: “ It is the silences, the hoong...hoong of Justice Chelameswar that would leave the lasting imprint of this hour-long conversation”.Here are the key takeaways from the discussion-Thapar- “Would you agree that the Supreme Court made a serious error in striking down the NJAC?”Justice Chelameswar- “...I do not consider the judgments of the Supreme Court to be synonymous with the constitutional truth...My judgments speak for themselves. The answer to your question can be found in my judgment.”Thapar- “Can I interpret this to be in respect of the majority judgment of the Supreme Court striking down the NJAC?”Justice Chelameswar: silence.Collegium SystemThapar: Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad had, in an interview to the Hindustan Times dated February 24, 2017, spoke about the need to audit the present collegium system post the experience in Justice Karnan’s case.Justice Chelameswar: No system is perfect and there is always scope for improvement and hence, the necessity of auditing the system.Relying on the letter of November, 2017 addressed to the Chief Justice of India, which was made public by Justices Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph at the January 12 press conference, Thapar asked: “the collegium had finalised and sent the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) to the government in March, 2016...the Law Minister in his interview had mentioned that the government was desirous of a screening committee to select the candidates before the collegium makes recommendations and also, the criteria on the basis of which the recommendations are made...but on January 12, you had said that the government has not responded to the MoP as finalised by the collegium...were the other four members of the collegium kept in the dark as to the response of the government? Is it not strange that the CJI kept the response of the government from the second senior-most judge of the Supreme Court?”Justice Chelameswar- “The choice of words is yours (laughter)...hoong, followed by a spell of silence lasting for a minute.Thapar: Should not the Collegium reiterate the recommendation to elevate Chief Justice of Uttarakhand High Court, Justice K.M.Joseph and the senior advocate, Indu Malhotra, as the Centre has not taken further steps following the earlier recommendation? Justice Chelameswar: hoong. Silence, with a body language suggesting that the Collegium members are helpless. Thapar: Are you reluctant to reply to this because it would embarrass the CJI.Justice Chelameswar: No. It is more an embarrassment to myself. Thereupon, Thapar read from the collegium resolution published on the Supreme Court website wherein it had been observed that Chief Justice Joseph is worthier than the Chief Justices and senior judges of most other High Courts. “Does this not imply tremendous support for Chief Justice Joseph?”, he inquired. In respect of Justice Chelameswar’s reaction thereto, Thapar remarked, “You are very articulate with your smile and your ‘hmmm’s...”Thapar- “would you say the collegium is presently in a dysfunctional state?” Justice Chelameswar- “we have just made recommendations just two days back...if the collegium was dysfunctional, would that have been possible?...we may have had differences, it does not mean we don’t see eye to eye. None of us are fighting over private property...” On the Order dated October 27, 2017, in R. P. Luthra’s matter In the context of the order of Justices Adarsh Kumar Goel and U. U. Lalit issuing notice to the Centre on a petition which brought to its notice the delay in finalizing the memorandum of procedure for appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts, Justice Chelameswar remarked, “The Division bench had rightly identified the problem...but the question is if the problem should have been dealt with by the division bench or the collegium...”Prasad Education Trust matterJustice Chelameswar- “I am still struggling to understand what had required the reversal of the order passed by a bench presided over by myself (for the setting up of a constitution bench of the five senior most judges of the Supreme Court)...I had not picked up the matter for myself to decide...the petition was mentioned before me, being the second seniormost judge, on a day when the CJI was presiding over a constitution bench...”*Continuing in the same thread, Justice...

Justice Jasti Chelameswar’s Eloquent Silences And Insightful Musings During His Memorable Conversation With Karan Thapar

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Justice Jasti Chelameswar’s Eloquent Silences And Insightful Musings During His Memorable Conversation With Karan Thapar

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers