Katju’s crisp riposte to Haider

Justice Markandey Katju’s opinion piece in The Hindu on issues of jurisprudence and Pakistan’s judiciary on June 21 and the subsequent blogs that he wrote at various Pakistani sites have stirred up quite a storm, inspiring many a comment in defence of the chief justice and Pakistani judiciary.
The original piece was titled, ‘Pakistani Supreme Court has gone overboard’, and it contained a dissection of the Supreme Court verdict in the contempt of court case, concluding that ‘the Pakistani Supreme Court has flouted all cannons of jurisprudence’.
His subsequent blog in a Pakistani newspaper under the heading ‘Judicial responsibility and organs of state’ not just further elucidated his views on the jurisprudential issues. Senator Iqbal Haider’s counter in another English newspaper under the title, ‘Has SC really gone overboard in Gilani case’ has drawn one final response from Justice Katju. This is what Senator Haider had to say: “The latest judgment by the Supreme Court to disqualify Mr Yusuf Raza Gilani under Article 63 (i)(g) has attracted a lot of controversy and some severe and unjust criticism… where many argue an elected prime minister could only be removed by a vote of no confidence in Parliament and not by any order of the Supreme Court. “…They are unabashedly accusing the present Supreme Court for the acts of former judges who were used by dictators and governments and who never exercised any independence.
“…They are mainly using an opinionated article by a former Indian judge, who happens to be a friend of mine and has my greatest respect, but unfortunately is not well informed about the details and merits of the Gilani case. This campaign is highly derogatory and looks to be well coordinated because some vested interests feel threatened by the independence and the uprightness of the chief justice and the court he leads, despite the nefarious conspiracy that was recently unleashed against him but died its premature death as it was malicious and a perverted attempt using black money, bribes, criminal intent and coercion.” Here is how Justice Katju, a former judge of India’s Supreme Court with a most distinguished record, responded: “I have already said what I had to say, and I have nothing further to add. “I have read Senator Iqbal Haider’s article and I find that he has not dealt with the issues I raised in my article… and earlier on a blog. And was it fair on his part to call my views opinionated? I could have replied that in fact it is Senator Haider’s view which is opinionated, because he is a practising lawyer and so has to keep the judges happy, but I refuse to go down to that level.
“He writes that Mr Gilani [Syed Yousuf Raza] should have appealed to a larger bench of the Supreme Court against his conviction. In my opinion that would have been futile because it seems that all the judges of the Pakistan have become docile before the chief justice, and the proof of that is that there was not a single dissenting opinion of any judge.
“Under our common system of justice, the chief justice is only the first among equals, and is not their superior, but it seems that all the Judges in the Pakistan Supreme Court are kowtowing before the chief justice and have become servile before him, otherwise why was there not a single dissenting opinion? “Senator Haider is not correct when he says that Mr Gilani did not take the plea of the president’s immunity. In fact that was his main plea. “However, I am not going to enter into this debate any further because instead of dealing with the jurisprudential issues I have raised, some people are bent upon going onto a personal level by describing my views as ‘opinionated’ etc.”