1)While UKSC's scolding a lower court that "democratically accountable" functionary's assessments on country's security can't be flipped, may create a difficulty for courts in countries that cite foreign rulings -Katju sahab's scolding by a UK court is a particularly tricky sitn.
2) on the face of it, the UK court has come out solidly behind the Indian SC. But it has also bashed an Indian SC ex-judge and shown no hesitation to publicly point out that his arguments are hypocritical and driven by latent political/ideological agenda.
3) This is something unimaginable in India, even at the hands of the only authority allowed to criticize a judge - that is a higher court/SC. Where perhaps, rightly or wrongly, any such admonishment wd be strictly in-camera for fear it would tarnish the "image" of judiciary.
4) Problem is that no matter where the admonishment happens, hidden or public, the tarnishing is entirely on perception by those vast majority who have no power over the legal system - whether criticism, reform, apportion guilt and responsibility and mete out penalties.
5) Indian judicial system left this problem hang out too long, seen as iconic in Markandeya Katju, but he is perhaps a symptom of the disease and neither the exception nor the cause. Public perception draws its own conclusions from visible contradictions, even if it is silent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
