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

Hearing commences. Dr. AM Singhvi arguing on behalf of Delhi Assembly.

#DelhiAssemblyNotice

#DelhiRiots

State legislature cannot be stopped from having discussion on subjects which are not under its legislative domain.

Many times State assemblies pass resolutions for eg say on human rights violations etc: Dr. Singhvi.

There is no ninth schedule republic of Facebook existing in this country: Dr. Singhvi.

#DelhiAssemblyNotice #DelhiRiots

There will be some overlap with the public order subject when discussing many things. That does not mean assembly is precluded from having a discussion: Dr. Singhvi.

#DelhiRiots #SupremeCourt

@Facebook

I am in fact calling them (Facebook) because I think their inputs are valuable. And they are saying 'no no': Dr. Singhvi.

Dr. Singhvi places reliance on Kalpana Mehta judgment to show the Committee's inquisitorial powers, powers to summon witnesses etc.

Public order is a term of wide amplitude. If anything which touches upon public order cannot be discussed then you might as well wind up 50 percent of work of assembly: Dr. Singhvi.

#DelhiRiots #SupremeCourt #DelhiAssemblyNotice

@Facebook @DrAMSinghvi

Justice Dinesh Maheshwari says issue is whether assembly can take up an issue beyond its Legislative domain.

Dr. Singhvi says it cannot be interpreted narrowly to restrict discussions in the assembly.

Bench rises for lunch. Hearing to resume at 2 pm.

#Facebook

Bench assembles; Hearing resumes.

@Facebook

#delhiriots #DelhiAssemblyNotice

If suppose the State Legislature is bringing in a bill on public order. Only once it becomes Act, Your Lordships can interfere.

In case of a committee to discuss, educate or deliberate, the remit is much wider: Dr. Singhvi.

The contention of @Facebook on legislative competence of committee is an after thought, claims Singhvi pointing to how Facebook responded to legal notice.

There is no violation of any Fundamental rights in this case warranting an interference under Article 32: Dr. Singhvi.

Petitioner Ajit Mohan is not a shareholder in Facebook or Facebook India. Facebook and Facebook India are corporations which cannot invoke Art 32. They can assert Art 19(1)(a) only through a shareholder which has not been done here: Dr. Singhvi.

Let us not get into hypertechnicalities because then we will have to get into other technical issues: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.

#DelhiAssemblyNotice
#Facebook

They cannot claim violation of Art 21. They have claimed violation of privacy but Your Lordships have clearly held that corporations don't have privacy unless Ajit Mohan's privacy is violated: Dr. Singhvi.

#facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

@DrAMSinghvi

It is not even a maintainable Art 32 petition: Dr. Singhvi

#facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

Let us say Facebook does not respond to the notice. Then what is your remedy? Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul

#facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

The committee can then refer it to the speaker. The speaker can then consider it and refer to an independent adjudicatory body which is privilege committee. The privilege Committee can then issue summons: Dr. Singhvi.

#Facebook #DelhiAssembly

Justice Kaul on how it can be enforced if the person is abroad.

Even Your Lordships face such situation says Singhvi citing Union Carbide case where CEO Warren Anderson refused to come despite courts from the bottom to top sought his presence.

Dr. Singhvi concludes.

Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the Peace and Harmony Committee says the summons that was issued was in consonance with the law of privileges.

#facebook #SupremeCourt

Dhavan says he will defend first and second summons and opines substitute summons should not have been made.

#facebook.

Mr. Mohan is out of the case due to substituted summons. That is my point: Rajeev Dhavan.

Senior Counsel Prashanto Sen commences submissions.

#Facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

Sen says there should not be so much scruntiny on which entry is being discussed and deliberated in the house because if that is done, then no deliberations can take place.

As far as privileges are concerned, no new privilege can be created as laid down in Raja Rampal: Sen

There are various questions which have come up with regard to the role of platform. That does not mean the platform is liable. We are just doing a fact finding exercise: Prashanto Sen concludes.

#DelhiAssemblyNotice #Facebook #DelhiRiots

Bench says it woukd like to hear Salve since fresh summons is not issued to Salve's client, Ajit Mohan but only to Facebook India.

What survives in this case with respect to Mohan, asks Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.

Salve is not present today. AoR says he will still address all the issues and will also argue for Facebook India.

#Facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan begins submissions on behalf of Peace and Harmony Committee.

@Facebook

#DelhiAssemblyNotice #Facebook

I will begin by taking an example. Take Delhi. It has lots of problems of communal harmony. Who will attend to the problem. Somebody has to attend it. Is parliament going to do it or Central govt?. The answer to that is no: Dhavan.

Can NCT of Delhi do it? According to them NCT cannot due to jurisdictional issue which is exclusion of Police and Public order from the ambit of NCT. The end result is there is nobody who will look into issues of peace and harmony: Dhavan.

#Facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice.

I shudder to think what consequences of such an argument would be. Because as per that argument, in case of any communal disturbance, the only action that can be taken is police action: Dhavan.

#DelhiAssemblyNotice #DelhiRiots

Nothing will be more harmful to peace and harmony than sending police to restore communal harmony: Rajeev Dhavan argues.

They are asking you to statutorise privileges. These are dangerous arguments to make and we suffered it during emergency: Rajeev Dhavan.

Article 194(3) as it stands today is frozen: Dhavan.

#Facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

Article 32 right is not available to corporations and I would also say to people who represent those corporations. So in order to avail Art 32 remedy, they got Ajit Mohan: Dhavan

#Facebook #SupremeCourt

So the veil on Ajit Mohan has to be lifted. He is not a shareholder. It is a symbiotic relationship between him and Facebook. So the petitioner before Your Lordships is Facebook and not Ajit Mohan. He is a sham petitioner to bring Art 32 into picture: Dhavan.

#Facebook

Privileges power is sui generis.

This is neither an Art 19 case nor an Article 21 case. Art 19(1)(a) corporates are out: Dhavan

#Facebook

This does not involve Art 13 since there is no law. That is why Salve came up with the argument that there should be a law. It will be good.

I think that is for Parliament to decide: Dhavan.

#facebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

Why did they want Mohan. Because they wanted an Indian citizen and he was the too most man: Dhavan.

#faceebook #DelhiAssemblyNotice

Bench rises for the day. Hearing to continue tomorrow.

#Facebook #DelhiLegislativeAssembly