Thread by @barandbench

Supreme Court is scheduled to take up for hearing shortly, petition filed by @Facebook India chief Ajit Mohan challenging the summons issued to him by Delhi Assembly's Committee in relation to #DelhiRiots2020.

@secondatticus #SupremeCourt

Senior Advocate Harish Salve appears for Petitioner: You can only summon those who is a party. If at all one is summoned is it limited to questions of evidence or fact. I may have strong opinions which I may not want to express

Senior Adv Salve: This is not a summon by the Parliament. The genesis of privilege is privilege against the crown. When the house of commons assemble they petition a ground. These are privileges by the crowm against the crown.

Senior Adv Harish Salve: is the doctrine of privilege a law ? The answer has to be No. This can only be done via a law and that has been the position post the Maneka Gandhi case.

Senior Adv Harish Salve: If Mr Ajit Mohan comes to court and says he does not want to speak about #Delhiriots and politically strong narratives then it is under free speech. Then once something is said you enter into what was not deleted or what was said etc

Senior Adv Salve: This enquiry will soon drift to why was something not taken down. It's not as simple as what were you doing on the evening of Delhi riots. This enquiry will soon get into areas of what is hate speech and what is permissible speech.

Senior Adv Salve: When IT ministry calls us, we will go. We have appeared before the Parliamentary committee too

Salve: You invited me and I chose not to come. How does cooperative federalism come into the picture ?

Justice Kaul: What we are examining is whether they can ask you to appear. Yes they can. But can they compel you to appear ? Next we have to see if its breach of privilege

Senior Adv Rajeev Dhavan: This all seems like a rejoinder to a three page note submitted by me

Justice SK Kaul: You have opened the book yourself (Law on Parlismentary Privileges)

Dhavan: no he would not have argued if he read my book

Senior Adv Salve: I can be criticized for not coming. But here I was being asked to take oath. Oath is when you given evidence on matters of fact.

#SupremeCourt: Is it that you can appear but not on oath?

Salve: No I don't want to appear. It is a very highly polarized area. My right to silence preserves this.

Bench breaks for lunch
To resume at 2 pm

Justice Kaul: Is it lunch for you?

Senior Adv Harish Salve who is in the UK: Its breakfast for me

Justice Kaul: you enjoy breakfast and others will enjoy lunch

#courtroomexchange

Hearing resumes

Senior Adv Harish Salve makes submissions

Senior Adv Salve: One has to be naive to believe that such a notice to be had anything to do with cooperative federalism.

Salve: It was alleged in Delhi court that Facebook had colluded with the accused in Delhi riots. It was also argued Facebook should be tried as a party with the accused.
@Facebook
#DelhiRiots
#SupremeCourt

Salve: Committees stand was clear. They simply wanted to say that Facebook was siding with the ruling government.

Justice Kaul: But committee cannot file a chsrgesheet

Salve: Man from @Facebook does not want to come before any committee. Unnecessarily being dragged into it

Salve: The committee has relied on Wall Street Journal summon the Facebook head. There is a fine article about how Legislature abuses its privilege. Facebook has its own policy and they are working according to that.

Senior Adv Harish Salve: any news report even if factual at times fan communal passions. The question is has operation of this platform aided disseminating information.

Senior Adv Harish Salve: I am surprised that an affidavit of this nature (by Delhi committee) has been filed before the highest court of this country.

Salve: Privilege is primarily supposed to act as a shield and enabld a house to conduct its business. Parliament primarily has two broad functions legislative and executive. Holding executive to check and make laws.

Justice Hrishikesh Roy: You are saying privilege as a shield can be taken only when summoning is by the assembly. But since here the summoning is by a committee outside the assembly then the shield of privilege will not apply?

Senior Adv Salve:Yes My Lord
@Facebook #SupremeCourt

Salve: I am not saying courts should control whats happening in the house. But here the proceedings are outside the house and within the realms of a committee.

Justice SK Kaul: Dr Singhvi had earlier argued that he wanted only a participation in the committee. So we are asking you at threshold don't want to appear or you want to look at participation.

Salve: Situation is polarized. I don't want to get into answering questions.

Senior Adv Salve: I don't run Facebook , it's been run by the Valley. You are trying to hold an inquisition against Facebook. We go to Ministry of IT because its a commercial necessity and they can shut us down. But Delhi committee cannot, we choose not to appear before them.

Senior Adv Salve: To us it appears as a politically motivated move. Just because they think we play a friendly match on the government turf, it's like come and play on our turf, (Delhi committee).

Salve: The IO of Delhi riots cannot put me on oath. @raghav_chadha can't say he is giving me a natural justice opportunity (laughs)

Senior Advocate Salve refers to the Arnab Goswami case where the Maharashtra assembly speaker had claimed privilege over the assembly discussions been provided in the #SupremeCourt by Goswami. Salve now refers to the N Ram case of breach of assembly privilege

Salve: They are not a privileged house. They are assembly of state Legislature. Only privilege they have is that no one can hinder them from their constitutional duty. Need more powers? Enact law by parliament. I can then again argue if that law holds under Articles 14, 19 and 21

Hearing adjourned.

Matter to resume on January 27

#SupremeCourt
@Facebook

Justice Dinesh Maheshwari: This committee Peace and Harmony committee was constituted on March 2. Any other document?

Senior Adv Salve: The assembly can produce it

Adv Shadan Farasat: it's already before you lordship in reply to the intervention.

#SupremeCourt