A people’s court must be open to public accountability
Live MintThe Supreme Court’s recent contempt judgement against Prashant Bhushan has again raised the question of what is considered legitimate criticism of India’s higher judiciary. The Supreme Court has evolved the judicial appointment system and enlarged its public interest litigation jurisprudence well beyond its original constitutional mandate, effectively converting itself into a people’s court. But after Indira Gandhi’s authoritarian rule during the Emergency and the related irregularities in judicial appointments, the Supreme Court went through a fundamental transformation on two accounts—judicial populism and judicial appointments. Legal scholar Anuj Bhuwania has chronicled long-running and procedurally-fluid PILs on slum demolitions and industrial as well as vehicular pollution, where the Supreme Court played a governance role by issuing mandamus writs to executive authorities. But, due to interference during the Emergency, the Supreme Court evolved new rules for the appointment of judges, different from those originally under the Constitution, to eliminate executive interference.