There was something truly surreal about images on various news television channels on the day Anna Hazare brilliantly trapped the government into taking him to Tihar jail. Even as one saw television images of urban Indians pouring out onto the streets to support Anna Hazare, the official channels were showing the historic proceedings of a Kolkata High Court judge Saumitra Sen being impeached for the first time in India?s history. In fact, during the very moments that Anna Hazare was defying government prohibitory orders, Saumitra Sen was personally defending himself against the charge of misappropriation of funds before the members of Rajya Sabha.
These contrasting images?an anti-corruption crusader courting arrest and a judge being tried by the upper house on corruption charges?are pretty much intertwined in the complex debate over the kind of Lokpal Bill that our society is striving towards. The impeachment proceedings running parallel to Anna Hazare?s arrest also demonstrated the growing tension between ??the legislature, judiciary, executive and civil society.
Rajya Sabha members cutting across party lines used the impeachment proceedings to make a larger statement on the general rot afflicting the judiciary. Many members suggested the collegium method of appointing judges (essentially existing judges recruiting new ones) was producing below par outcomes. Senior Rajya Sabha members like Arun Jaitley, Ram Jethmalani and Sitaram Yechury tore into the nature of compromises that were routinely happening in the judiciary in the current system which has little checks and balances.
Or else how do you explain the fact that Justice Saumitra Sen continued to hold R52 lakh in his custody which he had collected as an advocate-receiver appointed by the court on behalf of other disputing parties. Subsequently, when he was appointed judge after some years, he did not inform the court or surrender his receivership. He continued as a judge as well as a receiver! According to Jethmalani, it was his bounden duty to surrender his receivership the moment he took over as judge.
Jethmalani asserted that his misbehaviour as a judge persisted as he continued to stonewall proceedings by another single judge on the matter relating to the receivership. Of course, Saumitra Sen argued in his defence that he had eventually settled all the dues pending in the receivership and the affected parties hadn?t complained. However, Arun Jaitley, the BJP leader in the Rajya Sabha, asserted that illegality is not just determined by the outcome of a transaction, it also matters how the process had been undertaken. There are sections in the criminal procedure code which take cognisance of temporary misappropriation of funds even if subsequently they were legitimately settled.
Jethmalani launched a vicious attack on the community of judges in general who resorted to ?trade unionism? in order to protect their colleagues. He cited the example of Saumitra Sen who was being protected by his brother judges inspite of his known misdemeanours. After he became a judge in 2003, Saumitra Sen?s colleagues helped in expunging an adverse remark against him for his conduct as a receiver! ?If he were not a judge he would have been sentenced for at least ten years imprisonment,? Jethmalani argued.
Many Rajya Sabha members took the opportunity to suggest that the current collegium system of appointing judges may need a review. Some harked back to the times when the executive had a role in appointing judges! Overall, the debate in the Rajya Sabha reflected the mood of the times. The subtle message that came through was that of the legislature trying to tell the judiciary, ?Before overreaching your mandate, just put your own house in order. Or else you are in trouble.?
In fact, BJP member Ravi Shankar Prasad was more direct in warning the judiciary that, of late, it had been needlessly trying to appropriate the executive?s turf by readily setting up ?Committees to monitor the functioning of the administration?.
It appears that the law makers are in an angry mood over multiple attempts to nibble at their territory. This feeling comes through even in the context of the Anna Hazare campaign over the Jan Lokpal Bill which, if implemented, will create a super body that will oversee the executive, the judiciary as well as the legislature. There is unanimity across party lines that the Anna Hazare Bill is unacceptable. Even if for academic purposes one would love to see the result of a parliamentary vote on the Anna Hazare Bill! It is doubtful whether votes in favour of the Jan Lokpal Bill will even log a low single digit.
In his reply on the Anna Hazare arrest in the Lok Sabha, home minister P Chidambaram described as untenable the formulation of some prominent civil society leaders that ?people have faith in Parliament but not in parliamentarians?.
Anna Hazare had earlier been taking the position that India?s democratic process was flawed and that the electorate itself was corrupted by the largesse offered by political parties. Hazare had said this before the recent assembly elections. However, the Tamil Nadu polls proved him totally wrong as the people threw DMK out of power despite all the expensive goodies thrown at them.
The current situation can therefore be summed up as one in which the legislature and the executive are deeply distrustful of the judiciary, the judiciary is showing little faith in the executive and, finally, the civil society, as represented by team Anna, is showing no faith in the functioning of any of the other constitutional arms of the Indian State. This fundamental lack of trust in each other, if unresolved, is bound to create a political vacuum in the future. It could then become a recipe for undemocratic, even fascist, politics in the future. The most dangerous development is each one of these entities is seeking to blame ?the other? for the all pervasive corruption in society. The need of the hour is for all of them to look inwards and then seek a renewal. As Mahatma Gandhi would have advised, there is no alternative to self-cleansing.
mk.venu@expressindia.com