Highlighting that some individuals paint apparent disagreements between the administration and the judiciary on a subject as “Mahabharta,” Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said on Monday that this is “not true at all” and that debate and discussion are part of the democratic culture.
The minister’s comments come at a time when the government and the judiciary are at odds over the procedure of appointing judges to the higher courts.
Rijiju remarked at a Delhi Bar Association event at Tis Hazari courts here that he belongs to a political party where it is stressed that there might be “matbhed” (differences) but not “manbhed” (acrimony).
He said that the administration and the judiciary have ongoing conversations about a range of subjects and are in “live communication” with each other, discussing anything from little details to important ones.
“Sometimes, you will see are there some differences, is there is coordination between the government and the judiciary. If there is no discussion or debate in democracy, what democracy is it is. If the Supreme Court has some views, the government has some views, there are differences in the views, some people present it as if there is Mahabharata between the government and the judiciary. It is not true at all,” he was quoted by ANI in its report.
“There are differences..I have come from a political party. In My party BJP it is said from very beginning that there can be ‘matbhed’ but there should not be ‘manbhed’. We meet and there can be sometimes difference of opinion. It does not mean that we are attacking each other,” he added.
The Minister also advocated for a “strong and independent judiciary,” arguing that democracy cannot succeed if the independence of the court is compromised.
“For a strong democracy in India, a robust and independent judiciary is a must. If the independence of the judiciary is diluted or its authority, dignity and honour are weakened, then democracy will not be successful,” Rijiju said on Monday.
He said that various revisions to the Indian Constitution had been made in response to the current circumstances.
“Sometimes some challenges appear. We are a developing nation. It is wrong to think that there could not be changes in the running system. Changes are also made in an established system in view of challenges and situations. This is the reason Indian Constitution has been amended over a hundred times,” the minister said.
He said that people see judges and judge their decisions and methods of administering justice.
“After becoming judges, they don’t have to face elections or scrutiny by the public…Public is watching the judges, their judgments and the way they deliver justice, and make their assessments…In this era of social media, nothing can be hidden,” he said.
Rijiju had earlier this month sent a letter to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud requesting that government nominees for appointments to the higher courts be included in the collegium system.
Later, the Minister claimed in a tweet that the action was a response to the Supreme Court Constitution Bench’s order to invalidate the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act.
He claimed that the SC Constitution Bench had ordered the collegium system’s Memorandum of Procedure to be reorganised.
On January 16, the responding to a tweet from Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, the minister stated: “The contents in the letter to hon’ble CJI are exactly in conformity with the observations and directions of the Supreme Court Constitution Bench. Convenient politics is not advisable, especially in the name of Judiciary. Constitution of India is supreme and nobody is above it,” ANI reported.
“How can a govt’s nominee be part of the collegium? Some people make comment without knowing the facts! The Constitution Bench of hon’ble SC itself had asked to restructure the MoP. Search-cum-Evaluation committee is envisaged for preparation of panel of eligible candidates,” Rijiju had said in a tweet on January 17.
(With Inputs From ANI)
