National Herald: Opinion: Sunday, August 16, 2020.
Independent, impartial and effective
institutions are the guarantors of the rule of law on which a democratic
republic is founded. Robust institutions ensure that the rule of law is not
overwhelmed by the weight of numbers in a democracy. They protect citizens
against the arbitrary use of power by the state and its functionaries.
As India enters the 74th year of its
Independence, perhaps the biggest challenge faced by the republic is the
imminent collapse of its institutions of oversight.
Judiciary: Recent developments have
exposed deep faultlines in the Indian judiciary. The unprecedented press
conference addressed by four senior judges of the Supreme Court in January 2018
was apparently triggered by the arbitrary allocation of benches by Chief
Justices, with cases being ‘selectively’ assigned to particular judges to
obtain particular outcomes.
The allegations raised serious doubts
about the Independence of the judiciary, given that nearly 70 per cent of
litigation involves the government. These doubts have been further exacerbated
by the handling of several politically sensitive cases by the apex court
including the electoral bonds matter, Rafale deal case, habeas corpus petitions
of Kashmir and constitutionality of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.
In the last six years, the process of
judicial appointments has been stalled in several cases by the executive not
notifying the appointment of judges recommended by the collegium, even when
recommendations were reiterated. This is contrary to the settled law on
judicial appointments and has an adverse impact on the Independence of the
judiciary.
Unfortunately, many chief justices
have not pushed the matter with the government, giving rise to speculation that
it might be due to the lure of post-retirement jobs or the result of the
executive pressurising them through the use of investigative agencies.
The reluctance of the judiciary to set
up a robust and credible system to look into allegations of misconduct by
judges has seriously eroded public trust in the institution. Immediately after
allegations of sexual harassment surfaced against the Chief Justice of India
(CJI) in April 2019, the CJI presided over a hearing in which he himself was a
party, flouting the fundamental principle that no one should be a judge in
their own cause. In 2017 when allegations of financial corruption surfaced
against the then CJI in the medical college bribery case, the matter was
similarly dismissed with little regard for established procedures and
principles.
An important indicator of the health
of any institution is its ability to respond to criticism about itself and undertake
necessary reforms. The apex court did not cover itself in glory when, in
response to tweets by senior human rights lawyer Prashant Bhushan criticising
the functioning of the Court and alleging corruption in the judiciary, it
initiated suo-motu contempt proceedings against the him.
Information Commissions: There have
been consistent attacks on the institution of information commissions, which
are critical for proper implementation of the RTI Act - a law which has
empowered people to hold the government to account.
Fixed tenure and high status were
conferred on information commissioners under the RTI Act to empower them to
carry out their functions autonomously, without fear or favour. In July 2019,
despite stiff opposition within and outside Parliament, the government pushed
the RTI Amendment Act which defanged the transparency watchdogs. The amendments
empowered the central government to make rules to determine the tenure and
salaries of all information commissioners in the country - clearly signalling
that directions to disclose inconvenient information could invite adverse
consequences from the government.
Vacancies in information commissions
lead to large backlogs of appeals/complaints and concomitant long delays in the
disposal of cases, effectively frustrating people’s right to information. The
functioning of commissions has been severely impeded by governments not
appointing information commissioners in a timely manner.
The track record of the BJP led
central government has been particularly abysmal. Since May 2014, not a single
commissioner of the Central Information Commission (CIC) has been appointed
without citizens having to approach courts.
Lokpal: The Lokpal law was enacted in
January 2014 after a strong public campaign demanding the setting up of an
empowered and independent institution to tackle cases of corruption. The
chairperson and members of the Lokpal were not appointed till 2019, more than
five years after the law was passed.
The manner in which appointments were
finally made raised serious questions about the credibility of the selection
process. An important principle for ensuring Independence of such bodies is
that the selection committee should not have a preponderance of representatives
of the government and the ruling party.
Since no one was recognized as the
leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha after the 2014 elections, the
selection committee comprised of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Speaker of
the Lok Sabha, the CJI and Mukul Rohatgi, who served as attorney general during
the BJP regime. The appointment of the chairperson and members of the Lokpal ,
therefore, came under a cloud with doubts arising about an inherent bias
towards the selection of candidates favoured by the government and, therefore,
about the ability of the Lokpal to function impartially and independently.
Similar problems have been plaguing
the functioning of other institutions in the country. In the last general
elections, even the Election Commission was found wanting. Many of its
decisions - not taking note of infractions by leaders of the ruling party,
disregarding dissent of one of its own in handing out clean chits to the PM -
fuelled perception of bias and dented its image in the public mind.
Autonomous and robust institutions are
the bedrock of a democracy. Unless they stand as bulwarks against the multiple
challenges that threaten our republic today, there is a real danger that
peoples’ democratic rights are liable to be trampled with impunity.
.JPG)
.JPG)
