Alegaciones against CJI: miembros del panel de investigación interno de SC hicieron injusticia con la institución, dice Arun Shourie

NEW DELHI: The Judges Of The Supreme Court's Internal Investigation Commission, Who Gave A Talk To The Presiding Judge On The Allegations Of Sexual Harassment Against Them, Have Committed Serious Injustices With The Plaintiff, And As An Institution Former Minister Of The Union Arun Shourie Said On Wednesday

Shourie Claimed That Investigative Panel Members Act As" Members Of A Club" .

In The Current Controversy Over Accusations Of Sexual Harassment Against The CJI, The Three Judges Who Were Asked To Investigate The Matter Have Behaved As Members Of A Club. They Have Committed Serious Injustices With The Plaintiff, The CJI And With The Supreme Court As An Institution, He Said.

The Former Veteran Minister And Journalist, Who Was Giving His Fourth Lecture Of Nani Palkhivala Here, Said That Due To Weaknesses In The Entire Procedure Of Addressing Complaints, There Will Always Be Doubts That The Three Members Of The Committee Were Protecting The CJI That Will Corrode The Credibility.

" Due To The Illnesses And Inequities Manifested In The Procedure, The Doubt Will Always Persist, Even If It Is Unjustified, That The Three Judges Were Protecting It (CJI), It May Not Have Required Shielding." This Persistent Doubt Corrodes The Credibility.

" Skepticism Is Hardening Until It Becomes A Suspicion, However Unjustified It May Be. Why Did This Happen Because It Has A False Sense Of Institutional Loyalty That It Has To Safeguard This Reputation Of The Institution." That's The Old Notion Of The Club, Not Of Institution, Especially Not Of An Institution That Always Speaks Of Transparency, He Said.

The Theme Of Today's Conference Was #  What Should Lawyers And Other Professionals Do Today? " And It Was Organized On The Occasion Of The Centenary Of The Birth Of The Outstanding Jurist.

Shourie Said That The Three Judges Of The Committee Have Committed Serious Injustices With The Plaintiff, The CJI And The Supreme Court As An Institution.

By Refusing To Give Claimant A Copy Of The Report Of The Internal Investigation Committee, The Court Of First Instance Acted As The CBI Said.

In CBI, No ' T Give You The Declaration That You Have Registered In The Case. Denying A Person's Right To See Even What He Has Said, Which Is A CBI Practice, Has Become A Supreme Court Practice, He Said.

In Addition, He Stated That In This Case, The CJI Did Not Perform Its Judicial Functions.

The Former Supreme Court Judge, Judge Kurien Jospeh, Who Along With Judge (Retd) J Chelameswar YMB Lokur And The Current CJI Held The Prisoner Allegedly Against The Operation Of The Apex Court When Judge Dipak Misra Was The CJI He Also Spoke On The Occasion.

Judge Joseph Said That The Press Of January 12, 2018 Was Not Against A Person, But Rather Against The Trend With Which The Judiciary Was Shaken.

In Addition, He Said That Media Reports Indicated The Opposite, Which Shows That Information Has No Role In Today's Media.

The Media Are Not Doing What They Should Do And What They Can Do. Information Has No Role In Today's Media. The Whole World Wants To Know How Information Has Been Placed. Today There Are No Independent Media, He Said.

Simultaneously With Judge Joseph's Opinions, Senior Journalist Ashutosh Said That The Problem Arises When A Section Of The Media Manipulates Information In Such A Way That It Addresses A Type Of Ideology.

While Speaking On The Credibility Of The Judicial System, Shourie Said That, At Present, The Attorney General And The Attorney General Have Become The Defenders And Defenders Of The Government's Falsehood.

They Have Become Facilitators And Partners Of Evil, He Said.

In Addition, He Said That Because Of The Mentality Of Today's Lawyers To Serve Whomever Is First," The Best Thieves Get The Best Lawyers."

The Judicial World Has Become A Club. It's No Longer An Institution, He Said.

Shourie Said That The Least The Court Could Do In Cases Of Sexual Accusations Against Someone Like The CJI Was To Establish And Make Public The Procedure That One Should Follow.

The Supreme Court Establishes Guidelines In A Sentence (Vishakha Guidelines) But Will Not Apply To It. The Elemental Things Like The Video And The Audio Recording Of The Procedure, The Copy That Should Be Delivered To The Lawyers, The Defendant And The Plaintiff, Must Be Resolved. There Should Be A Standing Committee Of Three Judges. So That There Is No Fear Of Being Selected By Some Special Judges For The Special Case, He Said.

In Addition, He Said That The Appointment Procedures Have Been Under A Great Discussion And That The Executive" Tries To Use That To Usurp More Power."

Shourie Said That Trials Should Increase Faith In The Mind Of People For The Judiciary.

" If We Do Not Believe In Judgment, Imagine What Corrosion Has Happened ... I Do Not Think People Consider VVPAT's Failure Of Yesterday As A Merit" He Said.

On Tuesday, The Apex Court Rejected Petition VVPAT Review Of 21 Opposition Leaders Led By Prime Minister N Chandrababu Naidu Of Andhra Pradesh And Refused To Amend His April 8 Order That Ordered The Electoral Commission To Increase The Random Match Of The Slips VVPAT With The EVM To Five Casillas By Segment Of Assembly In The Elections Of Lok Sabha.