CJI and PM: A Breach of Judicial Boundaries?
On September eleventh, Prime Minister Narendra Modi posted two messages on X, previously Twitter, that includes pictures of him attending a personal Ganesh Puja on the residence of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justice DY Chandrachud. The identical day, a 29-second video was additionally uploaded on PM Modi’s official YouTube channel, displaying the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice praying collectively throughout the identical ceremony.
As a lawyer and a staunch believer within the sanctity of our judiciary, I discover this troubling. There’s—and should at all times be—a transparent and inviolable distance between the judiciary and the chief. When the pinnacle of presidency is seen collaborating in a personal non secular celebration on the house of the Chief Justice, the strains of separation blur dangerously.
The judiciary is the ultimate guardian of the Structure, the one establishment that, till now, has largely retained public belief. Nevertheless, moments like this undermine that belief. The looks of such closeness between the PM and the CJI dangers weakening the notion of the judiciary’s independence, which is paramount to its legitimacy.
We Have a Request for You: Preserve Our Journalism Alive
We’re a small, devoted crew at The Probe, dedicated to in-depth, gradual journalism that dives deeper than each day headlines. We won’t maintain our important work with out your help. Please think about contributing to our social affect initiatives: Help Us or Turn out to be a Member of The Probe. Even your smallest help will assist us maintain our journalism alive.
Whereas some might argue that this was a innocent cultural interplay, the implications can’t be dismissed so evenly. The judiciary should not solely be unbiased but additionally seem unbiased. In a time when the general public’s religion in democratic establishments is being examined, such actions chip away on the judiciary’s potential to be seen as a impartial arbiter, free from undue affect. This video will seemingly be remembered as a second that broken the very cloth of judicial independence in India.
The questions that come up from this occasion demand solutions from each the CJI and the PM. First, out of tens of millions of properties the place comparable Ganesh Pujas are happening throughout the nation, how did the Prime Minister select the residence of the Chief Justice? Extra critically, why did the Chief Justice of India, one of many highest constitutional authorities, enable the Prime Minister not solely to attend this personal non secular ceremony but additionally to tackle the function of officiating the puja—a place normally reserved for the elders of the family? Was this a symbolic gesture meant to sign closeness between the chief and the judiciary? In that case, it sends the fallacious message at a time when the judiciary’s independence should be fiercely protected.
The objections raised are usually not trivial; they go to the center of the integrity of the judiciary. Firstly, the Authorities of India is the most important litigant within the nation. What affect will this public show of camaraderie between the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice have on judgments the place the federal government is a celebration? Can the judiciary, significantly the best court docket, be seen as actually neutral in circumstances the place the federal government’s actions are underneath scrutiny?
This raises one other urgent query—what message does this ship to the decrease judiciary? Judicial officers throughout the nation look to the Supreme Courtroom because the standard-bearer for independence and impartiality. However when the pinnacle of the judiciary is seen in such shut quarters with the pinnacle of the chief, the very thought of judicial autonomy begins to erode.
Furthermore, what about those that search to litigate in opposition to the federal government, in opposition to the Prime Minister himself, or his occasion, the BJP? Will they’ve the boldness to pursue justice when the Chief Justice is seen participating with the very determine they may search to problem? The Chief Justice shouldn’t be solely the senior-most decide but additionally controls the roster because the ‘grasp of the roster’ and performs an enormous function within the appointment of judges nationwide. This place of immense energy requires an excellent larger accountability to stay above suspicion, indifferent from political or govt affect.
When others inform you what occurred, The Probe reveals why it occurred. Keep knowledgeable—be a part of our WhatsApp channel at present. Click on to hitch: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaXEzAk90x2otXl7Lo0L
Historical past is affected by examples of how the actions of judges, and their proximity to the chief, have eroded public belief within the judiciary. Again and again, we’ve witnessed how even a number of missteps—whether or not via orders, public statements, or personal correspondence—can undermine the very foundations of judicial independence.
Contemplate the case of Justice S.R. Sen’s disturbing comment that solely Prime Minister Modi might forestall India from “Islamisation.” Or Justice M.R. Shah’s open declaration that “Modi is my hero.” Then, after all, there’s the historic occasion of Chief Justice M.C. Chagla writing to Jawaharlal Nehru, praising him for elevating India’s international stature, and Justice P.N. Bhagwati’s congratulatory letter to Indira Gandhi after her return to energy in 1980. These actions tremendously compromised the general public’s religion within the judiciary.
However what we’ve seen with CJI D.Y. Chandrachud crosses a line that was as soon as unimaginable. This is not a controversial assertion or a letter quietly despatched to a head of state—that is one thing much more private and visual. A non-public prayer session with the Prime Minister on the Chief Justice’s residence, broadcast for all to see. If this doesn’t sign a breach of judicial independence, then what does?
The query that looms giant is how this 29-second video is likely to be used—or misused—by Prime Minister Modi’s most seen and influential buddies, similar to Gautam Adani, Mukesh Ambani, and M.A. Yusuff Ali, amongst others. What might this quick clip, posted on the Prime Minister’s personal social media deal with, imply for them as they navigate the judicial system? One can’t ignore the potential for this video to be wielded inappropriately by these well-known buddies or occasion leaders, significantly in decrease courts and even Excessive Courts, the place the affect of the chief on judicial issues will be extra direct and visual.
The true hazard, nonetheless, lies in how this video could also be perceived, particularly within the context of controversial judgments by which the CJI himself was concerned—rulings that favoured the federal government, PM Modi, Amit Shah, or their industrialist allies. The impression created is deeply unsettling. What are the folks now to consider these judgments? May this video reinforce the notion that the judiciary, significantly at its highest ranges, is prone to affect from the chief? That is the form of hypothesis that erodes the very basis of justice.
Probably the most damaging consequence of this video is not only its speedy affect, however its long-term impact on the general public’s religion within the judiciary. For a lot of, the judiciary stays the final refuge in a democratic system the place different establishments have faltered. However now, this temporary video dangers shaking the belief folks have positioned within the courts. It offers rise to doubts concerning the impartiality of previous, current, and even future rulings, significantly in circumstances involving the federal government or highly effective figures intently linked to the Prime Minister and his occasion, the BJP.
The Chief Justice of India undoubtedly owes an evidence to the folks of India. Because of this, greater than ever, there may be an pressing want for a proper protocol that governs the private and non-private interactions between the three pillars of our democracy—the legislature, the chief, and the judiciary. A transparent boundary should be established to stop such incidents from undermining the judicial system’s credibility and the sanctity of the Structure. This incident has the potential to shake the very belief that individuals have within the Indian judiciary. Now, it falls to the members of the judiciary, the Bar, and the broader authorized neighborhood to take steps to revive the boldness that has been so deeply shaken. It’s not nearly harm management; it’s about safeguarding the sanctity of the judicial system and defending the Structure that tens of millions rely on for justice.
