#SupremeCourt bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul to resume hearing plea by @Facebook India head Ajit Mohan against summons issued to him by Delhi Assembly’s Peace and Harmony Committee. Senior Adv Abhishekh Manu Singhvi to argue for Delhi Assembly today
@secondatticus
@secondatticus
@DrAMSinghvi seeks to make some prefatory submissions, refers to how other counsels have taken some number of hours
Justice Kaul: Seven and a half hours
Court adds that it would say, "both orally and in writing, it is more difficult to say things briefly."
#SupremeCourt
Justice Kaul: Seven and a half hours
Court adds that it would say, "both orally and in writing, it is more difficult to say things briefly."
#SupremeCourt
@DrAMSinghvi argues that the matter is premature, that there is no virtually cause of action.
There has only been summons. There is no attendance taken, questions not asked, answers not seen, he adds.
#SupremeCourt
#Facebook
There has only been summons. There is no attendance taken, questions not asked, answers not seen, he adds.
#SupremeCourt
Singhvi: Your Lordships are asked to give an advance ruling, an advisory opinion etc.
A premature, abstract, advance ruling is sought for, he argues. There is no active issue, he says.
#SupremeCourt
#Facebook
A premature, abstract, advance ruling is sought for, he argues. There is no active issue, he says.
#SupremeCourt
Singhvi: Barring...exceptional cases, your Lordships are told that while @facebook can appear before Parliament, it cannot appear before Assembly.
#SupremeCourt
#Facebook
#SupremeCourt
Court says that there are 3 issues: ... some part of your problem is the manner in which notice was issued.. to some extent, the problem is... even through a narrow compass, there are areas in the domain of State or under Centre...
#SupremeCourt
#Facebook
#SupremeCourt
Court: Second issue is that if you are holding an inquiry, can you compel a person to come before... that is an important aspect
#SupremeCourt
#Facebook
#SupremeCourt
Court: Thirdly, can that person say, "you may be wanting, I don't want to."... whether he can say this or not is the argument point.
#SupremeCourt
#Facebook
#SupremeCourt
The most crucial issue is, suppose you give appropriate notice, withdraw earlier notice - then according to your submission, is there an option to them to come and say they don't want to answer, Court asks.
Singhvi: The answer is no, but I have to make that (submission) good
Singhvi: The answer is no, but I have to make that (submission) good
Matter to resume in some time. Senior counsel AM Singhvi expected to join back after disconnecting from the virtual hearing due to technical issues.
#SupremeCourt
#VirtualCourt
#Facebook
#SupremeCourt
#VirtualCourt
Justice Kaul: If you withdrawing the notices issued and substitute with another notice then you can't have advance ruling on notice. Then you can withdraw them too and issue fresh notice.
Justice Kaul: But will that notice be within law and order subject? Our view is that you withdraw notices and file fresh one and then we can look into it. We can't give an advance ruling. Choice is yours.
Senior Adv Singhvi: By lunch Court Master can have requisite documents. Petitoners are arguing for an advance ruling. I have a right that if Mohan denies then I can refer it to speaker and the privileges committee can look into it.
#SupremeCourt
@Facebook
@secondatticus
#SupremeCourt
@secondatticus
Justice Kaul: We can either proceed on the basis of these notices or proceed on the basis of your withdrawal and issue fresh notices. Senior Advocate Salve has argued in a wider basis. We can either narrow it down or hear it on the basis of earlier submissions
Senior Adv Rajeev Dhavan: That kind of notice is a familiar notice for the Parliament and all state assemblies. That you follow summons or if privilege committee looks into it. When Parliament sent a notice, the etiquette to follow was also laid down.
Senior Adv Dhavan: the committee has followed the same format of notice. The foot note of the first notice was so damaging that it goes into the heart of the issue.
Senior Adv Harish Salve: My client will not go. We cannot get this deferred by saying a new notice will be issued
Senior Adv Harish Salve: My client will not go. We cannot get this deferred by saying a new notice will be issued
Justice Kaul: Your stand has been you will not go and will not speak. But now their stand on notice is something that they will take a call.
#SupremeCourt
@Facebook
#SupremeCourt
SC: Your assembly is different than a state assembly. Whatever powers conferred you have or what is not there you don't have. Mr Dhavan will argue on the constitutional bonhomie
#SupremeCourt
@DrAMSinghvi
@Facebook
#SupremeCourt
@DrAMSinghvi
Dr Singhvi: approach of petitoners if accepted will mean the death knell of committee working in the Parliament. Real working that happens in the committee is amazingly productive and coordinated
@DrAMSinghvi
@DrAMSinghvi
Dr Singhvi: A proposal was made to have cameras in committee meetings. It was decided not to have a camera inside committee working as it would hamper the working of the committee. Another fallacious aspect was some committee they will go to and some they won't.
Dr Singhvi: There is one subject committee, one is select committee and the third is under general purpose committee head. We are happy if Facebook is represented by number 1 to number 20 man
Justice Kaul: Mr Salve said by issuing notice to number 1, you are compelling Mohan to come & not someone else from @Facebook
Singhvi:Thats a distortion of fact We don't have a mesmerized tie up with Mohan. Ofcourse we don't want the lowest grade person but someone respinsible
Singhvi:Thats a distortion of fact We don't have a mesmerized tie up with Mohan. Ofcourse we don't want the lowest grade person but someone respinsible
Singhvi: My notice was never objected to apart from Mr Salves oral submissions
Justice Kaul: Mr Salve said Mohan cannot be compelled and no oath can be forced. Secondly no notice was issued to Facebook
@DrAMSinghvi : I have never said only Mr Mohan should appear
Justice Kaul: Mr Salve said Mohan cannot be compelled and no oath can be forced. Secondly no notice was issued to Facebook
@DrAMSinghvi : I have never said only Mr Mohan should appear
Justice Kaul: We are noting this then that you are open to others appearing too
Dr Singhvi: Senior, responsible and competent person from @Facebook appears in person before the committee with our powers intact. We will be issuing a fresh notice
Dr Singhvi: Senior, responsible and competent person from @Facebook appears in person before the committee with our powers intact. We will be issuing a fresh notice
Dr Singhvi: Did Mr Mohan say that he will send anyone else other than the Vice President. The petitioner is on a constitutional high horse as of now
Hearing resumes.
Senior Adv Abhishek Manu Singhvi: Choice of going before which committee is for court to decide or legislatire to create. Its as if committee headed by @raghav_chadha are non legislative committee. There is lack of respect and deference for a legislative organ
Senior Adv Abhishek Manu Singhvi: Choice of going before which committee is for court to decide or legislatire to create. Its as if committee headed by @raghav_chadha are non legislative committee. There is lack of respect and deference for a legislative organ
@DrAMSinghvi : There is an IT act and Facebook says its an intermediary and either sender or receiver is guilty. This is the worst barrage of arguments and prior interpretation of IT Act. When you make it a wide canvas the casualty is the specifics
Singhvi: These grand flights of jurisprudence advanced on past several days is based on per se lack of power. All this is shadow boxing being done. There is or is not a press conference. The language of the conference is X Y Z.
Singhvi: Certainly no corporate entity and none of its officials would be unready to come before a committee unless the centre supports this. Its undeniable that issues of riots etc in Delhi was the upper most issue.
Singhvi: If Delhi discusses it even if Central govt does not agree then a corporate entity cannot take refuge under Centre. Committee proceedings are house proceedings. Normally this Court does not look into house proceedings.
Justice Kaul: Fundamental thing is either Court will get into or it will not
Singhvi: summons are issued and no steps are taken and you take a level that fundamental rights are violated. How things are conflated.
Singhvi: summons are issued and no steps are taken and you take a level that fundamental rights are violated. How things are conflated.
Dr Singhvi: Forming the committee in March and the two documents of terms of reference is not challenged.
Justice Kaul: they only want the summons issued to be quashed.
Justice Kaul: they only want the summons issued to be quashed.
Singhvi: Facebook has attended and answered all matters of question before a committee of concern and here you do not appear. Unless they rule out our jurisdiction on the basis of Atomic Energy like subjects, such avoiding cannot happen
.@DrAMSinghvi : We have someone here who claims to be a Republic of Facebook in Republic of India. Their stand is against the established norm where a committee has the power to summon and enforce presence of an individual including a corporation
@Facebook
Singhvi: whenever a committee call someone a committee things can be said which are not to the liking of many and could be defamatory. There is that protection. Parliament has consciously not codified its privileges.
@DrAMSinghvi : This is because Parliament believes its powers are not untramelled. In Keshavananda Bharti, Justice Khanna could have codified the basic structure. Later it was asked topics like secularism etc to be basic structure.
Singhvi: This is because you believed that such things cannot be kept watertight.
Justice Kaul: so you are saying not to codify
Singhvi: yes codification will make it ajusticiable. Thats my personal view
Justice Kaul: so you are saying not to codify
Singhvi: yes codification will make it ajusticiable. Thats my personal view
Dr Singhvi: Facebook questioning the 70 year wisdom is bizarre. The law of reading entry is not to nitpick. It is not to say whether 90 percent is covered and 10 percent not there. How can entry 39 is contrary to basic structure?
@Facebook
Justice Kaul: The argument put forth is Constitution envisages power but carves out exceptions.
Singhvi: Despite barring A,B,C , list 2 applies to me. When did my lord say that I cannot summon a private corporation
Singhvi: Despite barring A,B,C , list 2 applies to me. When did my lord say that I cannot summon a private corporation
Singhvi: Specific exclusion of 1,2, and 18, it means that all other provisions are applicable to Delhi. Entry 39 is there for us. Committee has the power to take evidence on oath.
Justice Kaul: All of the rules submitted are for summoning witnesses. Are they administered oath ?
Singhvi: yes deposition is to the organ of the Legislature. They are not used against the parties. But 99 percent cases oath is administered.
Singhvi: yes deposition is to the organ of the Legislature. They are not used against the parties. But 99 percent cases oath is administered.
@DrAMSinghvi : No one can arrest you for despising before the committee. These are all meant to prepare a report. Constitution bench judgment had held that Delhi has hold over all subjects in state list except the ones mentioned.
Singhvi: The committee can call collect evidence and statements. Giving powers without excerciding it runs the powers impotent. Here a person challenged summons without a privilege notice
Singhvi: I am not arguing xenophobia, I am arguing on principles. One cannot say they will appear before European committee and not here because the subject does not suit us. Nothing is argued by them apart from jurisprudential heights @DrAMSinghvi
@secondatticus @raghav_chadha
@secondatticus @raghav_chadha
Dr Singhvi: please refer to the print out
Justice Kaul: these are violation of environmental norms by printing so much!
Justice Kaul: these are violation of environmental norms by printing so much!
Justice Kaul: The deterrent is two volumes..
Senjor Adv Singhvi: The thing is these are judgments.. 6 judgments in two volumes
J. Kaul: I don't want to say anything here. Unlike US or England, if a verdict is not cited in detail then its said that a verdict is not appreciated
Senjor Adv Singhvi: The thing is these are judgments.. 6 judgments in two volumes
J. Kaul: I don't want to say anything here. Unlike US or England, if a verdict is not cited in detail then its said that a verdict is not appreciated
Singhvi: No difference between Delhi or Madhya Pradesh assembly.. its a full assembly its called truncated because it does not cover the three subjects in the list. That's all
Dr Singhvi elaborates on Article 239 AA of the Indian Constitution.
Justice Dinesh Maheshwari states that there is internet disruption near Tughlak road that's why Justice Kaul's courtroom is not visible. Justice Maheshwari informs @MTNLOfficial working on it
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta: Even in Akbar Road
Matter adjourned for tomorrow
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta: Even in Akbar Road
Matter adjourned for tomorrow
Role of @Facebook in Delhi Riots: Supreme Court hears Facebook India head's challenge to Delhi Assembly summons [LIVE UPDATES]
#SupremeCourt @AamAadmiParty
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
#SupremeCourt @AamAadmiParty
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
