Skip to main content

Listen To The Supreme Court, Or Else !

Many Americans hate George Bush for Iraq. That hate rises as the body bags keep piling piling up. Three days ago, two CBS journalists were blown up by a car bomb in Baghdad. A third one barely survived. The journalists were in Iraq out of choice. The scores of dead American soldiers were not. What option does the American public have ? Very little. They elected George Bush. In a democracy, you've got to follow the process.

The student community is rightfully angry with the Government. Its protests have had some impact, but nowhere as enough. That only goes to show how thick skinned our politicians can be. Particularly where they perceive a larger votebank connect. We can protest, oppose, picket and shout slogans. Or wear black badges.

We can keep agitating against the ruling political class or certain members of it. We can fight for their removal. Or ask them to pull back. Or boycott them at every turn. And keep up the protests. But they too represent the will of the majority. Whether or not you agree with it. Yet, you can keep the pressure up.

SC Is `Highest' Authority

The courts work a little differently. The Supreme Court is the `highest' authority of the land. They are a part of the same democratic system and process the politicians belong to. And they represent the final `voice' in many issues. Disregarding that voice is tantamount to contempt of court. And contempt of court is a serious matter. And the SC has a habit of flexing its muscles to remind citizens of this.

I may not agree (and have not) with some SC rulings or judgements in the past. But the democratic process which allows me the freedom to express my views also constrains me from speaking out against the Supreme Court. Arundhati Roy discovered this to her chagrin in March 2002 when the Supreme Court jailed her for a day for criminal contempt of court.

Much as I disliked the Court's treatment of Roy, I realise that a polity like ours has to respect some authority at some point. Else you will have anarchy. The adventerous lot within us may desire that too that but its not such a great idea. A somewhat functioning democracy (as some would describe the State of India) is better than one that has collapsed totally.

Courts Work, Sometimes !

So, to conclude, if the Supreme Court tells you to stop protesting, my suggestion is you should. If you build up your case well, the Court can help get justice. In the past, they've demonstrated the ability to delve dispassionately into detail. And arrive at workable solutions. But taking on the Court for no reason except to convey a sense of distrust against all authority may not be the best idea. Not at this point of time. Not on the issue of reservations.


Balaji said…
I agree to what you say to an extend. Do you think that the court will be able to give a solution for this present scenario, knowing very well how our judicial system works. if they are any way half as good as they claim to be, there won't be so many cases in our courts isnt it? For eg. The supreme court have banned bandh's in India. But does it work? Ask any one in Kerala, I am sure he will say it does not, because political parties are innovative, if not progressive. Now we have harthals, where all the establishments are closed down. I do beleive that justice will be done, but will it be implemented by our govt. is any body's guess.
My idea of free speech and everything else in the constitution somehow is in direct opposition to the archaic rules concerning contempt of court. I can't say that the court system is good in the US or other democratic countries but one is not barred from dissenting with a ruling of the court there. Just because one dissents against the court does not mean that the entire system will collapse and we will have a state of anarchy or that the dissenter has a grand plan to de-stablize the country. A civilized democracy should not and must not be afraid of dissent, it forms the backbone of civil society. But, if i am to gather whats been happening around India a lot (riots, religeous clashes, hartals and Bandhs forced by one political party or the other to suit their purpose) and tell myself that I live in a civilized democracy, I'd be fooling myself. Perhaps thats the reason why Mr. Govind says that the best thing to do is to obey the rule of the SC. Lets not agree with the ruling if we don't like it, but, until we become a real civilized democracy, perhaps we need someone to whip us once in a while. Lets find other ways to keep the issue on the front burner.
Anonymous said…
The UPA dispensation at the Centre is likely to bring in a legislation to legitimize reservation rather than heed the SC ruling, as they have done on many previous occasions.This govt is brazen ,immoral and a lawless one.They will surely find a way of circumventing the SC judgement.After all only their kith and kin stand to gain from reservations!

Popular posts from this blog

Why Did Aamir Khan Swing For Narmada ?

He is not the first celebrity to do so. But he’s turned out to be the most radical, activist Bollywood filmstar by far, all in day's least as far as my memory serves me.

The reasons why he would back the Narmada Bachao Aandolan
could be several. Ranging from the fact that a cousin associated with the movement influenced him to the fact that he was in and out of the Kutch for six months whilst the shooting of Lagaan.

Lets assume all that contributed significantly. Still, why join the protestors in the manner he did ? Why become a face for the movement ? Knowing well there could be consequences that may not be the most desirable.

Dammed If You Do..

To his credit, he did not buckle to the mob frenzy that followed his signing up a few days ago. Instead, he calmly called the attention of all and sundry and asked if these were really the politicians and political parties they wanted to be led by ? He even accused the political parties of trying to bully him.

There are those who de…

Jan Lokpal Bill Movement: Lessons For India's Middle & Ruling Classes

`Supercop' Kiran Bedi learnt the hard way (or so we hope) how not to hold fort when she resorted to somewhat unusual theatrics to drive home a point about elected representatives. She was on stage as Gandhian Anna Hazare fasted to get the Indian Government to agree to pass the Jan LokPal Bill, a strong anti-corruption bill. His fast ended on 28 August 2011, 12 days after it started.

The fast (and the strategy thereof) has attracted kudos and criticism alike. The critics call the fast and the accompanying protests blackmail. The supporters say politicians are not known to respond to the usual greet, meet and review process. As they have not in the past. Moreover, the country has lived with unprecedented levels of corruption for decades and across all walks of life. And cannot tolerate it any longer. Extreme conditions call for extreme responses. Both sides however agree that the issue of corruption in public life must be addressed, with some urgency.

I see it a little differently.…

The Zone

I was watching Indian captain MS Dhoni's eyes when he hit the sixer that catapulted India to victory at the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 on Saturday night. Only someone with numbing focus and meditative concentration, oblivious to the utter mayhem and cacophony all around, can play a shot like that. It was the definitive, you-guys-can-take-this stroke from a cricketer wanting to leave a permanent stamp on the game.

To be fair, many such definitive shots have been played, match winning and otherwise. But it was one of the few I would categorize as belonging to The Zone. Spiritual expert Jaya Row who once defined the Zone to me. "Its your ability to disconnect totally from the world outside and be in total control of your mind and body for that moment," she had told me.

I have always wondered about the role of spirituality (secular) in our lives. Ms Row, a Vedanta expert, defined ita appropriately. "Think of Sachin Tendulkar when he is facing a bowler. Look at his face…