Illusion: Something wrongly perceived or interpreted by the senses; fantasy, figment of the imagination, trick.
Delusion: Peculiar self-deceptive belief firmly maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument; typically a symptom of mental disorder.
Disillusion: Disappointment resulting from the discovery that something is not as good as one believed it to be; disenchantment, a rude awakening to be forced to face reality.
Some time ago in an interview, former Supreme Court Judge Deepak Gupta opined that evaluation of Judges is a very necessary process, on criteria which would balance credibility, transparency, integrity and competence of the Judge along with the quality of Judgments, noting also that while District Judges across the country are evaluated, judges of High Courts and Supreme Court are not.
As I said in an earlier write-up Supreme Court judges choose their words carefully and if such judges considered necessary evaluation of Judges of the highest court and cite as requisite criteria “credibility, transparency, integrity and competence of the Judge along with the quality of Judgments” one would be excused for assuming that in enough cases to have caused such public assertion to be made, these criteria are either missing or not adequately met. In either case the ball is squarely in the Court!
This is all the more disturbing an assertion coming as it does when the Supreme Court is grappling with serious issues facing the country and not seeming to be able to do what would be, and appear to be, Justice.
Impunity is “exemption or freedom from punishment, harm, or loss.” Violence to citizen rights continues because the actors fear no reprisal: institutions which can seek accountability are comprised of the same type of people that terrorize –the police force, the politicians and judicial officers turn a blind eye because it suits them, and violence continues because all these persons remain protected. Police officers act with impunity for similar reasons that military officers do: AFSPA. The system and its malfunctioning have led them to believe it is okay, so they act with impunity. Another deadly add-on is judicial-prosecutorial discretion. A friend, formerly practising law, told me he’d argued a matter before a Tribunal and the Members were convinced his client was innocent. When they rose for lunch, he was aghast: the prosecutor and Tribunal Members were having lunch together! Immediately after, without further hearing they returned verdict against his client. “Could there be another reason?”, he wondered. Is this how “the system” should work?
Groups are treated differently in very similar situations, especially when the police are involved. Restraint is shown to certain people (don’t ask which ones) while harsh, repressive and excessive force is used against certain other people (don’t ask which ones). “So what? Are you unaware of Floyd’s death that sparked US riots? Happens everywhere, right?”
One Anushrut Sharma asserts as a response to a write up “…the Hindus in India are like the Blacks in South Africa and the Muslims of India are comparable to the whites of SA. For centuries, it is the Muslim rulers who used state power …all the while colonially subjugating India.” He doesn’t seem to know the meaning of colonialism. He speaks of Taimur and Aurangzeb and Jaziya not knowing a bit about any of them. He refers to “…Hindus, who are enjoying political power in their own land after centuries of colonial subjugation.”
OMG : “Hindus…” “…in their own land”! Bloody hell: here we Muslims believe it is our land too! What brilliant people write these responses to write-ups! If there was a Nobel Prize for litter…!
Another chips in with “…something Anti-Christian …what you accuse Right Wingers doing. …How are you okay with Proseltyzing (sic)? It is tantamount to Cultural Genocide…” Babri demolition was cultural genocide, brother. Did you raise your voice? And proselytizing reminds me: A newly inserted point of amended Indian Visa guidelines adds “Restriction in Engaging in Tablighi Activities.” Not preaching. Tablighi. Reminds you of Jamaat… and a Covid-Jihad canard. Apparently there is no restriction in visiting religious places attending religious discourses… but no preaching religious ideologies, …“spreading conversion etc. will not be allowed.” So far we were aware forcible conversion, conversion via inducements, proselytizing in religious precincts of other faiths were proscribed. Now, this “spreading conversion” is a new thing. And it’s not okay if it is Tabligh? Tabligh so far as I know is not either Hindu, or even Christian, in its origin. More important, Tablighi Jamaat people do not convert anyone! They interact only with Muslims! Their objective is to make Muslims better Muslims, that is all. No conversion, no political agenda, nothing (fully investigated during late PM Indira Gandhi’s time by IB). But what an opportunity, no? Mauka! Ban them! Every TJ member carries a Quran. What will the system call it? “Carrying Jihadi literature?” Natwar Singh suggests TJ be banned: outrageous demands fetch notoriety and “associated institutional support”!
Misinformed official illusion leads to a system responding to a delusion. Delusional thinking precipitates ill-considered knee-jerk responses. Inappropriate official responses lead to public disillusion in the system. Tabligh as a term as yet undefined, must all Jamaatis now stand by for exercise of officialdiscretion? Going by what recent times have thrown up, once that discretion is exercised, the matter goes to some Tribunal. While the citizens hope for justice, on occasion Tribunals have relied excessively on official stands, abdicating solemn judicial duty.
Citizens in Courts and applicants in foreign consular offices must therefore be greeted by and have the benefit of judiciousness based on the requisite criteria of “credibility, transparency, integrity and competence” that Justice Deepak Gupta of the SC cited, upholding Constitutional values, not having to apprehend colliding with nuanced exercise of judicial-prosecutorial discretion that legitimises an avoidable necessity to call in question “credibility, transparency, integrity and competence of Judges,” raising queries about the “quality of Judgments” and seek judicial accountability. Will they?
The citizen wants to know!
Shafeeq R. Mahajir is a Hyderabad-based nationally known lawyer