Prashant Bhushan 'should go' for review before Supreme Court constitutional bench

Prashant Bhushan at a Narmada Bachao Andolan meet

By Medha Patkar*
The verdict in the contempt case against Prashant Bhushanji is something to be pondered over by us all. The court has not withdrawn nor reviewed its first order holding him guilty of contempt.

The judiciary, however, has tried to take cognizance of the voice of the voiceless, one raised by Prashantji for people in Narmada river valley and in the struggles for justice in every sector, and the Voice for Freedom raised by the countless number of people upholding the courage, commitment and truthfulness by this fearless advocate of human and constitutional rights. It has certainly noted the support to the legal and social battle by the former justices and bar associations across the country.
The judgement by the Apex Court has been delivered today when it was not just magnanimity but it’s sensitivity and commitment to the freedom of speech and expression as well as every constitutional right of each citizen that was at stake.
When lakhs and lakhs of people have removed all blinkers and begun speaking out in support, the Hon Members of the Hon Bench couldn’t be narrow minded or reactive, nor could it be self- indulgent and had to be generous and considerate.
When the attempt to make Prashantji apologise didn’t work, the Hon Court had to rethink on its position although couldn’t revert back. The order on the sentence passed on August 31 indicates the Court’s interest in giving a second chance to close the matter with a symbolic punishment.

Medha Patkar

However, the Hon Bench hasn’t stopped at charging Re 1 as fine, rather has allowed him to have a choice which is again perturbing for anyone who would weigh it carefully. When the alternative to paying fine is 3 years judicial custody and (not ‘or’) ban from appearing in the supreme court for 3 years is equated with Re 1, one wonders whether this is undermining monetary value as punishment or considering jail and the bar as non- deterrent.
Now we know that the Hon Court has stuck to its position on the contempt and whatever may be the choice by Prashantji, they want him to accept and respect the Hon Court’s order, which is admitting contempt.
Taking the legal battle forward, Prashantji can and should certainly go for a curative/review, before the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, and sensible and sensitive citizens committed to civil liberties and freedom of expression must continue to support him in further fight for justice, inside and outside the court, through Bar Associations as well as people’s movements.
We, at Narmada Bachao Andolan, stand with Prashant Bhushanji, ready to accept and support his Satyagrahi decision. We are also ready to pay Re 1 if the Hon Court considers our expression of support too as nothing short of contempt.
---
*Leader, Narmada Bachao Andolan

Comments

US govt funding 'dubious PR firm' to discredit anti-GM, anti-pesticide activists

By Our Representative The Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) has vocally condemned the financial support provided by the US Government to questionable public relations firms aimed at undermining the efforts of activists opposed to pesticides and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in India.

Modi govt distancing from Adanis? MoEFCC 'defers' 1500 MW project in Western Ghats

By Rajiv Shah Is the Narendra Modi government, in its third but what would appear to be a weaker avatar, seeking to show that it would keep a distance, albeit temporarily, from its most favorite business house, the Adanis? It would seem so if the latest move of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) latest to "defer" the Adani Energy’s application for 1500 MW Warasgaon-Warangi Pump Storage Project is any indication.

Bayer's business model: 'Monopoly control over chemicals, seeds'

By Bharat Dogra* The Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) has rendered a great public service by very recently publishing a report titled ‘Bayer’s Toxic Trails’ which reveals how the German agrochemical giant Bayer has been lobbying hard to promote glyphosate and GMOs, or trying to “capture public policy to pursue its private interests.” This report, written by Joao Camargo and Hans Van Scharen, follows Bayer’s toxic trail as “it maintains monopolistic control of the seed and pesticides markets, fights off regulatory challenges to its toxic products, tries to limit legal liability, and exercises political influence.”

Militants, with ten times number of arms compared to those in J&K, 'roaming freely' in Manipur

By Sandeep Pandey* The violence which shows no sign of abating in the ongoing Meitei-Kuki conflict in Manipur is a matter of concern. The alienation of the two communities and hatred generated for each other is unprecedented. The Meiteis cannot leave Manipur by road because the next district North on the way to Kohima in Nagaland is Kangpokpi, a Kuki dominated area where the young Kuki men and women are guarding the district borders and would not let any Meitei pass through the national highway.

105,000 sign protest petition, allege Nestlé’s 'double standard' over added sugar in baby food

By Kritischer Konsum* 105,000 people have signed a petition calling on Nestlé to stop adding sugar to its baby food products marketed in lower-income countries. It was handed over today at the multinational’s headquarters in Vevey, where the NGOs Public Eye, IBFAN and EKO dumped the symbolic equivalent of 10 million sugar cubes, representing the added sugar consumed each day by babies fed with Cerelac cereals. In Switzerland, such products are sold with no added sugar. The leading baby food corporation must put an end to this harmful double standard.

Can voting truly resolve the Kashmir issue? Past experience suggests optimism may be misplaced

By Raqif Makhdoomi* In the politically charged atmosphere of Jammu and Kashmir, election slogans resonated deeply: "Jail Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Jail’s Revenge, Vote) and "Article 370 Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Article 370’s Revenge, Vote). These catchphrases dominated the assembly election campaigns, particularly across Kashmir.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

NITI Aayog’s pandemic preparedness report learns 'all the wrong lessons' from Covid-19 response

Counterview Desk The Universal Health Organisation (UHO), a forum seeking to offer "impartial, truthful, unbiased and relevant information on health" so as to ensure that every citizen makes informed choices pertaining to health, has said that the NITI Aayog’s Report on Future Pandemic Preparedness , though labelled as prepared by an “expert” group, "falls flat" for "even a layperson".

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded reaction in the form of a link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

Search This Blog