Skip to main content

Commitment to Constitutional morality under shadow? Modi-Chandrachud 'bonhomie'

Counterview Desk 
India's top human rights organization, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), has said that neither the BJP and Narendra Modi, seeking to defend what it calls the "bonhomie between the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India" refuse to understand that the their participation at the Ganapati Pooja "violates canons of law, ethics and constitutional morality."
Stating that the controversy is refusing to die down, PUCL said, "The fact that the Chief Justice not only did not demonstrate aloofness, but instead demonstrated an  unconstitutional bonhomie, sends the message right down the judicial hierarchy that is indeed acceptable to fraternize with the executive. It is a tragedy that the message that these values adopted by no less than the full court, can be bypassed, should have been sent by no less than the Chief Justice of India."

Text: 

The visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the house of Chief Justice Dhananjaya Chandrachud on 12th September, 2024 to participate in Ganesh Aarti has triggered a constitutional controversy due to its cavalier disregard for foundational constitutional principles.  The controversy refuses to die down with  both the BJP and the Prime Minister doubling down in defence of the same.  The BJP spokesman has argued in a rhetorical fashion as to ‘why should not the different pillars of democracy be friends?  Should they be enemies?’ The Prime Minister has sought to politicize the response by stating that the Congress ecosystem was angry because he participated in a Ganapati Pooja.
Both defenses refuse to understand that the ‘controversy’, which this visit has invoked is  not about ‘different pillars of democracy being friends’ but about an unconstitutional bonhomie. It is not about an invidious attack on the participation in a Ganapati pooja, but about the propriety and indeed the constitutional morality which the visit violates. It is fundamentally about  questions of law, ethics and constitutional morality.  
There are two fundamental principles of the Constitution which are relevant to understand the issues which arise from the visit. First, is the principle of separation of powers and second is the principle of independence of judiciary. Both have been held by the Supreme Court itself as fundamental to the governance of the country.
The Supreme Court has extensive judicial review powers which entitles it not merely to strike down administrative actions but also legislations and even Constitutional Amendments. Union of India is one of the major  litigants before the Supreme Court. On a daily basis before multiple Benches of the Supreme Court including the Bench presided over by the Chief Justice, the  Union of India is a litigant. Mr. Modi, in his capacity as a Prime Minister is the Chief Executive of the Union of India. Besides, in his capacity as the Head of the ruling Parliamentary coalition, he  is also virtually the head of the legislative wing. 
It is therefore vital that the constitutional Laxman Rekha which governs the relationships between the two wings must not be crossed and must not even be perceived to be crossed by two individuals who in their person represent  the executive and the judiciary.
One can have no objection to religious beliefs which either the Chief Justice or the Prime Minister hold. Similarly one cannot object to Justice Chandrachud or Prime Minister  performing Ganesh Aarti at their home or elsewhere.  They are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and religion as any ordinary citizen. One can also not have any objection to their meeting in public functions where they are meeting in their official capacities. 
One may also not have serious objection to their meeting at a private function where large number of other members of public are present- such as a wedding or an Iftaar party. However a personal invitation to the Head of the executive by the Chief Justice for a private exclusive religious ceremony at home undoubtedly raises  doubts about whether the conduct is within the four corners of the constitution. 
This would be the case irrespective of whether cameraman was present or not and whether this was widely circulated in the social media or not. Of course, the constitutional error is compounded by this private meeting being  videographed and circulated as if to communicate that there is nothing wrong in personal relations between politicians and judges, even when the same judges are adjudicating virtually on a daily basis on the decisions of the executive. It bears noting that the government is the largest litigant in the Supreme  Court. 
It is of course possible for a judge to have personal relations with either a private or a public figure. But then they follow the extremely important convention  of recusing from cases in which they know a party. Recusal is not because of actual bias but to avoid even the very perception of bias. 
The message which has gone out is  of an unconstitutional bonhomie between the  judiciary and the executive at the highest levels. This severely compromises the perceived  ability of the judiciary to ask difficult questions to the executive and ensure that it does not transgress the limits imposed by the Constitution. In fact, the unconstitutional bonhomie sends a signal right down the judicial hierarchy that it is perhaps better not to take too seriously the principle  that ‘A judge should practice degree of aloofness consistent with the dignity of his office’. This principle was articulated as a ‘Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’  which was  adopted by the full Court meeting of the Supreme Court way back on 7th May, 1997. The fact that the Chief Justice not only did not demonstrate aloofness, but instead demonstrated an  unconstitutional bonhomie, sends the message right down the judicial hierarchy that is indeed acceptable to fraternize with the executive. It is a tragedy that the message that these values adopted by no less than the full court, can be bypassed, should have been sent by no less than the Chief Justice of India. 
The other values which a judge is enjoined to follow as per the  “Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’ include:
Paragraph 16: “Every Judge must at all times be conscious that he is under the public gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in which that office is held.”
Similarly,  the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002 which have been ratified by the Economic and Social Council  states the following: 
“1.3  A judge shall not only be free from inappropriate connections with, and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government, but must also appear to a reasonable observer to be free therefrom. 
2.2.  A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the judiciary.
3.2 The behaviour and conduct of a judge must reaffirm the people’s faith in the integrity of the judiciary. Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. 
4.2 As a subject of constant public scrutiny, a judge must accept personal restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. 
4.6 A judge, like any other citizen, is entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly, but in exercising such rights, a judge shall always conduct himself or herself in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.”
Both constitutional morality and ethics dictate that Judges should follow these values in full. 
It is unfortunate that  the Prime Minister’s personal visit to the Chief Justice’s house breaches the above principles. Undoubtedly in the past such episodes have happened like Bombay High Court Chief Justice M.C. Chagla’s letter to Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1953 and Justice Bhagwati’s infamous letter to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1980. But these have been criticized in the past and they do not in any way justify the recent publicized visit of the Prime Minister to the Chief Justice’s house  causing a breach  in the  principles of separation of power and independence of judiciary which are primary constituents of rule of law and democracy.
By breaching the above principles, what has come under a shadow is the commitment to Constitutional morality by those at the very apex of the Indian state.  As Babasaheb Ambedkar reminded us, ‘Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment, it has to be cultivated’.  It is expected that those in high constitutional office will nurture this delicate plant called constitutional morality and not pull it up by its roots.
We seriously urge the Chief Justice to make constitutional recompense and  repair the  shaken faith of the common person in democracy, rule of law and the separation of powers by ensuring that henceforth  there is a scrupulously adherence  to the Bangalore principles and the ‘Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’. 
-- Kavita Srivastava, President; V Suresh, PUCL

Comments

TRENDING

1857 War of Independence... when Hindu-Muslim separatism, hatred wasn't an issue

"The Sepoy Revolt at Meerut", Illustrated London News, 1857  By Shamsul Islam* Large sections of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs unitedly challenged the greatest imperialist power, Britain, during India’s First War of Independence which began on May 10, 1857; the day being Sunday. This extraordinary unity, naturally, unnerved the firangees and made them realize that if their rule was to continue in India, it could happen only when Hindus and Muslims, the largest two religious communities were divided on communal lines.

The curious case of multiple entries of a female voter of Maharashtra: What ECI's online voter records reveal

By Venkatesh Nayak*  Cyberspace is agog with data, names and documents which question the reliability of the electoral rolls prepared by the electoral bureaucracy in Maharashtra prior to the General Elections conducted in 2024. One such example of deep dive probing has brought to the surface, the name of one female voter in the 132-Nalasopara (Gen) Vidhan Sabha Constituency in Maharashtra. Nalasopara is part of the Palghar (ST) Lok Sabha constituency. This media report claims that this individual's name figures multiple times in the voter list of the same constituency.

N-power plant at Mithi Virdi: CRZ nod is arbitrary, without jurisdiction

By Krishnakant* A case-appeal has been filed against the order of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and others granting CRZ clearance for establishment of intake and outfall facility for proposed 6000 MWe Nuclear Power Plant at Mithi Virdi, District Bhavnagar, Gujarat by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) vide order in F 11-23 /2014-IA- III dated March 3, 2015. The case-appeal in the National Green Tribunal at Western Bench at Pune is filed by Shaktisinh Gohil, Sarpanch of Jasapara; Hajabhai Dihora of Mithi Virdi; Jagrutiben Gohil of Jasapara; Krishnakant and Rohit Prajapati activist of the Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has issued a notice to the MoEF&CC, Gujarat Pollution Control Board, Gujarat Coastal Zone Management Authority, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board and Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) and case is kept for hearing on August 20, 2015. Appeal No. 23 of 2015 (WZ) is filed, a...

Spirit of leadership vs bondage: Of empowered chairman of 100-acre social forestry coop

By Gagan Sethi*  This is about Khoda Sava, a young Dalit belonging to the Vankar sub-caste, who worked as a bonded labourer in a village near Vadgam in Banskantha district of North Gujarat. The year was 1982. Khoda had taken a loan of Rs 7,000 from the village sarpanch, a powerful landlord doing money-lending as his side business. Khoda, who had taken the loan for marriage, was landless. Normally, villagers would mortgage their land if they took loan from the sarpanch. But Khoda had no land. He had no option but to enter into a bondage agreement with the sarpanch in order to repay the loan. Working in bondage on the sarpanch’s field meant that he would be paid Rs 1,200 per annum, from which his loan amount with interest would be deducted. He was also obliged not to leave the sarpanch’s field and work as daily wager somewhere else. At the same time, Khoda was offered meal once a day, and his wife job as agricultural worker on a “priority basis”. That year, I was working as secretary...

Proposed Modi yatra from Jharkhand an 'insult' of Adivasi hero Birsa Munda: JMM

Counterview Desk  The civil rights network, Jharkhand Janadhikar Mahasabha (JMM), which claims to have 30 grassroots groups under its wings, has decided to launch Save Democracy campaign to oppose Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vikasit Bharat Sankalp Yatra to be launched on November 15 from the village of legendary 19th century tribal independence leader Birsa Munda from Ulihatu (Khunti district).

Ground reality: Israel would a remain Jewish state, attempt to overthrow it will be futile

By NS Venkataraman*  Now that truce has been arrived at between Israel and Hamas for a period of four days and with release of a few hostages from both sides, there is hope that truce would be further extended and the intensity of war would become significantly less. This likely “truce period” gives an opportunity for the sworn supporters and bitter opponents of Hamas as well as Israel and the observers around the world to introspect on the happenings and whether this war could have been avoided. There is prolonged debate for the last several decades as to whom the present region that has been provided to Jews after the World War II belong. View of some people is that Jews have been occupants earlier and therefore, the region should belong to Jews only. However, Christians and those belonging to Islam have also lived in this regions for long period. While Christians make no claim, the dispute is between Jews and those who claim themselves to be Palestinians. In any case...

Two more "aadhaar-linked" Jharkhand deaths: 17 die of starvation since Sept 2017

Kaleshwar's sons Santosh and Mantosh Counterview Desk A fact-finding team of the Right to Feed Campaign, pointing towards the death of two more persons due to starvation in Jharkhand, has said that this has happened because of the absence of aadhaar, leading to “persistent lack of food at home and unavailability of any means of earning.” It has disputed the state government claims that these deaths are due to reasons other than starvation, adding, the authorities have “done nothing” to reduce the alarming state of food insecurity in the state.

Bangladesh alternative more vital for NE India than Kaladan project in Myanmar

By Mehjabin Bhanu*  There has been a recent surge in the number of Chin refugees entering Mizoram from the adjacent nation as a result of airstrikes by the Myanmar Army on ethnic insurgents and intense fighting along the border between India and Myanmar. Uncertainty has surrounded India's Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport project, which uses Sittwe port in Myanmar, due to the recent outbreak of hostilities along the Mizoram-Myanmar border. Construction on the road portion of the Kaladan project, which runs from Paletwa in Myanmar to Zorinpui in Mizoram, was resumed thanks to the time of relative calm during the intermittent period. However, recent unrest has increased concerns about missing the revised commissioning goal dates. The project's goal is to link northeastern states with the rest of India via an alternate route, using the Sittwe port in Myanmar. In addition to this route, India can also connect the region with the rest of India through Assam by using the Chittagon...

Fate of Yamuna floodplain still hangs in "balance" despite National Green Tribunal rap on Sri Sri event

By Ashok Shrimali* While the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Thursday reportedly pulled up the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for granting permission to hold spiritual guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's World Culture Festival on the banks of Yamuna, the chief petitioners against the high-profile event Yamuna Jiye Abhiyan has declared, the “fate of the floodplain still hangs in balance.”