CJI's statement of principles reassuring

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) N V Ramana did not offer any new or unconventional ideas on the issues that he spoke about in his P R Desai Memorial lecture last week. He spoke about the value of democracy, the rule of law and the role of the judiciary in a constitutional system, going into some detail about what they meant and how there could be challenges to them. He stated only some basic principles, but they have importance and a special resonance in the current environment. They needed reiteration because the quality of democracy is declining, the rule of law is under stress and the judiciary has been found wanting on occasions, and there is no better person to talk about them than the head of the country’s highest court. His words and views carry more weight and credibility than those of others who have expressed the same views.

Justice Ramana said that a “properly functioning democracy’’ needs a “reasoned and reasonable’’ public discourse. His warning that the right to change governments through elections “by itself, need not be a guarantee against tyranny” needs to be heeded because there are increasing assertions that victory in elections gives legitimacy and legality to all decisions and actions of governments. Elections are only one of the processes of democracy. “Day-to-day political discourses, criticisms and voicing of protests’' are vital and integral to democracy. This again needed retelling because protests and dissent are now dubbed as anti-national and seditious. The statement that the executive and the legislature must “assume responsibilities of upholding constitutional values and ensuring justice in the first place” so that the judiciary can act as an important check later is also significant in this context.

The CJI’s stress on judicial independence is an assertion of the obvious, and it is reassuring. The keywords are: “For the judiciary to apply checks on governmental power and action, it has to have complete freedom. The judiciary cannot be controlled, directly or indirectly, by the legislature or the executive, or else the rule of law would become illusory.” It has the responsibility to ensure that the laws are in conformity with the Constitution. The judges also should not allow themselves to be “swayed by the emotional pitch of public opinion amplified through social media platforms’’. In a constitutional democracy, citizens and their freedoms are vital, and there should be independent institutions to protect them. The Supreme Court made some important interventions recently on issues like the vaccination policy and migrant workers’ rights. There are cases before the court in which the rights of citizens, legality of the government’s decisions and justice for sections of people are involved. Hopefully, there will be early decisions on them.