The minister has also reminded his audience that, with the advent of social media, people now have the ability to speak for themselves...
Digital Desk: Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju, one of the main voices in the government vs. judiciary debate, stated today that judges are not required to contest elections or face public scrutiny. They are still in the public eye due to their activities and decisions. "People are watching and judging you. Your decisions, your work method, the way you administer justice... People can see and evaluate... They create opinions "he said to great applause at an event of the Delhi Bar Association.
He also reminded his audience that, with the advent of social media, people now have the ability to speak for themselves. " It's not like before when there was no platform and only "netalog (leaders)" could talk," the minister said.
In this context, he stated that the Chief Justice had asked for his help with the harassment that judges face on social media. "How can that be controlled? Judges can no longer respond to it on social media. The government was urged to take a firm step. I've noted it and know how to fix it," he added.
Since 1947, there have been many changes, therefore, it would be incorrect to assume that the current system will last and never be challenged, Rijiju said. The changing reality dictates the need, which is why the Constitution has had to be revised more than a hundred times, he said.
The government has been seeking a greater role in appointing judges, claiming that the legislature is supreme since it reflects the will of the people. The Supreme Court has delivered a strong reminder to the government that while parliament can make a law, it is within the court's power to "scrutinise" it.
"Tomorrow, somebody will argue the basic framework is also not a part of the Constitution.... If every section of society starts putting down which law is to be respected and which is not, it will lead to a breakdown," Justice SK Kaul had said.
Rijiju has repeatedly complained about the lack of transparency in the present Collegium method of appointment, in which names are chosen by a panel of the country's senior Supreme Court judges. Yesterday, he had cited a retired judge's opinion on the matter to highlight what he called "sane views" of "the majority".
Leave A Comment