Thread by @barandbench

Prashant Bhushan to address media at 11 am as he deposits ₹1 fine to the Supreme Court for Contempt of Court.

Discussion hosted by CJAR & Swaraj Abhiyan on “Freedom of speech and judiciary”, begins. @AnjaliB_ briefs the audience on the case background.

@pbhushan1

Despite him giving a very clear explanation on why he had given the tweets... the Court went ahead and declared @pbhushan1 guilty of contempt: @AnjaliB_ recounts

Today Prashant is going to be given the ₹1 fine. A review petition is being filed against the judgment: @AnjaliB_

Today will also see a discussion on "Freedom of speech and the Judiciary" which will see the participation of:

Justice (Retd.) Madan Lokur;
N Ram;
Aruna Roy; and
Yogendra Yadav.

The discussion will be moderated by Anjali Bhardwaj.

@nramind
@_YogendraYadav
@AnjaliB_

Justice (retd.) Lokur says he has some things to say on free speech, but he won't speak on the Contempt judgment against @pbhushan1 since a review petition is pending and also since Bhushan has already covered everything that needs to be said in his defence.

What can a citizen do, he can only continue to speak, Lokur observes.

Lokur: The State is using an iron hand to curb free speech... Today we are seeing the common man being charged with sedition. The number of sedition cases being filed is increasing.

#FreedomOfExpression

Justice (retd.) Lokur: Sedition is being used as a sort of iron hand to curb free speech, which I think is an overreaction to people's expression of opinion.

#FreedomOfExpression
#Sedition

Justice (retd.) Lokur says that another issue is treatment of opinion as #FakeNews.

An expression of opinion, speculation that a possibility may happen is being viewed as fake news: Lokur says

Justice (retd.) Lokur: That also is an overreaction to the expression of an opinion by the State which views the opinion as incorrect.

Justice (retd.) Lokur: Another way in which free speech is curbed is by misreading speech.

Lokur adds that this is what happened in the case of @pbhushan1. He says that he believe's Bhushan only meant to point out some things.

Justice (retd.) Lokur notes that that preventive detention is being imposed on people by misreading the intent of their speeches.

On the other hand, "You have people who talk about violence, about breaking up things - nothing happens to them."

Justice (retd.) Lokur adds that another issue is (the misuse of) preventive detention

The unfortunate thing is that people who are put under preventive detention are not challenging it: Lokur

Justice (retd.) Lokur: It is difficult to sustain preventive detention, but it is not being challenged, maybe because people are afraid.

Justice (retd.) Lokur voices concern over case pendency: I have gone to the e-courts website. 3 Crore 40 lakh cases are pending.

Justice (retd.) Lokur: I think the judiciary has to be transparent.

They have to tell us, are they doing anything.. If they are, then they should tell so that they can get the reaction of lawyers and litigants.

Lokur also speaks of the large numbers of people who don't want to commence physical hearings, while the courts are going ahead with it.

Justice (retd.) Lokur speaks on Bhushan's contempt case:

He (@pbhushan1) expressed his opinion. He said future historians will see the role of 4 CJIs, that lockdown is wrong. And to put him in jail.. (What he expressed)it is a matter of opinion!

N Ram: The judgment by the Justice Arun Mishra Bench (contempt judgment against @pbhushan1) is a very fearsome judgment...

But when it comes to punishment (Re 1 fine), it is incongruous... very heinous offence was alleged.

@nramind

Ram opines that in recent times, as lawyers and scholars have pointed out that there isn't enough of protection for freedom of speech.

The laws are not enough. There is not enough protection for free speech, including the freedom of the press, in which I am particularly interested: @nramind

@nramind: The problem is that to a layperson, the Supreme Court, and particularly this Justice Arun Mishra Bench (in the Contempt judgment against @pbhushan1) seems to claim something akin to the right to "Sky-high powers."

@nramind: It is a kind of absolutism. Certain portions of this judgment, at least to lay reading - give the impression that the Supreme Court is claiming sky-high powers. This, I think, has to be challenged.

@nramind: Instead of curbing free expression, paradoxically, the Prashant Bhushan case gave a stimulating effect.

The Supreme Court is in the limelight. Several articles have been written. I don't think they are going to enjoy it, but it is necessary.

barandbench.com/columns/justic…

@nramind referring to several opinions on this including by @gautambhatia88: It (Court) has become an executive's court rather than a rights court.

N Ram also echoes Justice (retd.) Lokur's opinion that there is an uneven application of the law when it comes to free speech

N Ram also refers to how a Madras HC judge has sought to haul up @Suriya_offl over comments on NEET.

@nram: What did Surya actually say? He commented that while judges themselves are holding proceedings via Video Conferencing, students are being asked to write NEET without fear.

N Ram also expresses his appreciation for the position taken by Attorney General KK Venugopal in the @pbhushan1 case, whereby he stated that several judges and even himself have made comments on corruption.

@nram: I think it is time for people to speak out. The "few and far factors" has to become greater. On the whole, I am optimistic that this has led to an awakening, perhaps even within the judiciary that this has gone too far and we must come out in the side of freedom of speech

@pbhushan1 addresses press conference as he goes to deposit the Re 1 fine at the Supreme Court.

Prashant Bhushan: I am going to the Supreme Court with a draft for Re 1.

@pbhushan1 (in Hindi): This is not to say that I accept the Judgment. We have filed a review petition. And 2 days earlier I have filed a writ petition for the right of an appeal in the criminal conviction before a larger bench.

Read story:

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

Prashant Bhushan has helped us a lot. So we have come to help him. We are with him: Says a villager from Rajasthan (translation from Hindi)

The gathering also sings a song expressing solidarity.

Social Activist Aruna Roy speaks: As @nramind said, this judgment has stimulated people.

How did this happen? Because when the Court ruled against @pbhushan1 more people felt that it is also against them because he is educating 100s of ordinary citizens through his litigations..

Aruna Roy also refers to various people who have been accused in the #DelhiRiots case.

@pbhushan1 had also registered criticism today over @SitaramYechury, @UmarKhalidJNU being accused for speaking against #CAA.

Aruna Roy: What is the intent behind this? The real intent is to shut those voices up and (to shut) the amplification of these voices.

The 1 re is not just a symbol. These are small things but assume great significance with mass mobilisation. Even the Dandi march began with salt

Aruna Roy (in Hindi): We will not be silenced. This a message I want to send out clearly. Why would we stay silent? Have we done anything wrong? We will fight against injustice, whoever it is who does wrong - whether it is parliament or the judges.

Arun Roy: This intent to spread fear will not work. We are empowered by the Constitution. We stand with Prashant. The more people are sent to jail, with that much more courage, we will stand.

@pbhushan1

A video is played featuring various people and organisations expressing support for @pbhushan1 and recounting how he has helped in pro bono litigation for social causes over the years.

Professor Anand Kumar, National Convenor
@swaraj_abhiyan, speaks in support of @pbhushan1: We need freedom to be fearless... we need fearless to be responsible.. Prashant Bhushan has created a role model...

@_ProfAnand

@AnjaliB_ speaks of Satyameva Jayate fund or the "truth fund" to be used to support and amplify voices of people who are peacefully fighting against injustice.

Guidelines would be laid down on the use of the fund, any Indian citizen can join by contributing Re 1 (or more)

@AnjaliB_ : There are 100s of Prashant Bhushans...This fight has made the resolve of people stronger...

@AnjaliB_: We are not asking of alms, we are fighting for our rights, and no government or court can't tell us that we cannot.. We will continue to fight against oppression peacefully within and outside courts.

The virtual meet has come to an end.