Congress Kerala Apologises To CJI Surya Kant For Disrespectful X Post, Says Person Liable Removed

The Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) has tendered an unconditional apology to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for a disrespectful post published on the official X account of the Indian National Congress Kerala. The KPCC stated that it was posted without authorisation, and the person responsible for the post, Vijay Thottathil, has been removed from his position.

In its reply to a legal notice sent by Advocate Meneesh Dubey, the Joint Secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association, KPCC President Sunny Joseph tendered an unconditional apology to the CJI for the publication and the disrespect conveyed by its language. The committee also said that Thottathil had been asked to issue a public apology.

The post, published on October 12 and later deleted after it sparked a controversy, demanded the CJI's resignation and suggested that the organisation would find a replacement for him.

In his reply to the legal notice, Joseph stated that the post was published by Thottathil without the prior knowledge, approval or consultation of the KPCC leadership. He clarified that neither he nor the party leadership had authorised Thottathil to demand the CJI's resignation or suggest that a replacement would be found.

"The expressions reproduced in your notice do not represent the policy, considered opinion or authorised position of the KPCC and that of the Indian National Congress," the reply stated.

The KPCC said that the leadership had disapproved of the post and expressly repudiated and withdrawn the statements in question. It described the demand for the CJI's resignation and the suggestion of finding a replacement as inappropriate and said that such expressions should not have appeared on an official party platform.

"The KPCC unequivocally reaffirms its respect for the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional office of the Chief Justice of India," Joseph stated.

The committee acknowledged that the incident raised concerns about its digital communication oversight, even though the leadership had not authorised the post.

The reply stated that the KPCC would examine the arrangements governing access to its social media accounts, the authority entrusted to their operators and the approval procedures applicable to official communications.

The examination would cover the drafting, review and publication of the post, the persons involved at each stage, account permissions, devices used and any relevant prior instructions or internal correspondence.

The KPCC also undertook to preserve relevant electronic records, access logs, approval records and internal communications, clarifying that the removal of the post from public display should not result in the destruction of material relevant to any lawful inquiry.

The committee further said that the involvement of an external professional agency in its digital communications did not dispense with the need for effective oversight.

Recognising the distinction between criticism of judicial decisions and language that undermines the dignity expected in public discourse, the KPCC stated that political disagreement could not justify the expressions used in the post.

The reply also denied any suggestion that the KPCC president had personally directed, approved or endorsed the publication. At the same time, the committee accepted the need to examine the failure of its communication controls and take appropriate measures to prevent a recurrence.

 The legal notice sent by SCBA Joint Secretary had asked the KPCC president to disclose the identity and designation of the person who authored and published the post, as well as those who approved or authorised it. Advocate Dubey also sought an explanation for the absence of an express public apology to the CJI and details of any formal reprimand or disciplinary action against the person responsible, beyond removal from the position.