Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Accountability is the sine qua non of democracy. Transparency facilitates accountability. No public institution or public functionary is exempt from accountability although the manner of enforcing accountability may vary depending upon the nature of the office and the functions discharged by the office holder. The judiciary, an essential wing of the State, is also accountable. Judicial accountability, however, is not on the same plane as the accountability of the executive or the legislature or any other public institution. The rationale for this difference is the essential requirement of judicial independence and the ability of the judges to discharge their functions without any hope of reward or fear of penalties. Judicial accountability lies in scrutiny of judgments by the appellate courts. Judgments can also be subject to critical analysis and constructive informed criticism by the legal profession, academics, the media and members of the public including parliamentarians. Criticism of a judgment even if it is robust and pungent does not tantamount to contempt of court provided it is not based on false factual statements and does not attribute extraneous considerations to the judges. There is a world of difference between criticising a judgment as grossly erroneous and attacking it as dishonest. Regrettably, a litigant who has lost fails to realise this vital distinction. More regrettably, some senior advocates who have lost a case promptly indulge in mudslinging in the media of the judges who have rendered an adverse decision. Judges need to be protected against this form of forensic terrorism.
Another facet of judicial accountability is that judges, if they misconduct themselves, are subject to strict discipline by the mechanisms provided under the Constitution and the law. The mechanisms should be transparent and effective whose primary aim should be to enforce accountability without impairing judicial independence. Much will depend upon the persons manning the disciplinary mechanisms which should be effective and not be perceived as an old boys club anxious to cover up lapses out of a feeling of judicial camaraderie. These are the basic parameters of judicial accountability.
Literary Headaches
One warning constantly dinned into us is that too much of a good thing is not good. This warning was disregarded by young fans of the Harry Potter books. The consequence was that three children, aged 8-10 developed severe headaches. Diagnosis by Howard J Bennett, a Washington pediatrician who treated these children, was that a tension headache was brought on by the effort required to plough through the latest 870 page book. The obvious cure of taking a break from reading was rejected by the child patients, who preferred acetaminophen instead. That indeed is loyalty to Harry Potter. Interestingly, the headaches disappeared one or two days after the children had finished wading through the book. J.K. Rowlings should have no qualms about sales of her Harry Potter books.
Musical Prodigies
Young children are greatly admired, indeed eulogised, for their talents. This is especially true in the field of music. The late Yehudi Menhuin was a shining example. This feature was highlighted by the spontaneous ovation which the young Hungarian Gabor Bolla received for his fantastic performance last Friday in Delhi. Gabor goes to school in Budapest. He first learnt to play a recorder, then moved on to the clarinet and thereafter switched over to the tenor saxophone. His tone and technique are reminiscent of the great Sonny Rollins. The event was very heart-warming for me because I had the good fortune to hear Gabor Bolla in Budapest in May 2000 when he was thirteen. Happily I was successful in persuading the Hungarian Cultural Centre to invite him to participate in the recent 2003 Jazz Yatra in Delhi which he did and thrilled Delhi jazz fans.
