Sane advice

It is unfortunate that President K. R. Narayanan's advice that, as far as possible, all sections of society should be represented in the ...

It is unfortunate that President K. R. Narayanan8217;s advice that, as far as possible, all sections of society should be represented in the judiciary is being turned into an ugly controversy. Tendentious writing on the subject is creating the impression that presidential activism has given rise not to one conflict but several. It does harm to the office of the President and to Rashtrapati Bhavan8217;s relations with the judiciary and the government to politicise the issue. Above all, if the whole matter continues to be given political colour it will scuttle valuable advocacy for the cause of social equality. Enough damage has been done already and it is urgent that a sense of perspective is restored.

In notations on an official document in November and again at a seminar on judicial reforms in December, the President said that in recommending appointments to the higher judiciary due consideration should be given to members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, to women and other under-represented sectionsof society and regions of the country. It does no service to the Chief Justice of India or the Prime Minister to assume they have any reason to take umbrage at advice which accords with the spirit of the Constitution and objectives of national policy. Indeed they are bound to endorse the intentions underlying the President8217;s statements. In furtherance of the principle of fairness the President has felt it necessary to make known his views. The statistics show that there are too few members of the SCs and STs and too few women in the higher judiciary. The President is not arguing for proportional representation reservations. He makes it very clear more than once that merit should get the highest priority. Where deserving candidates are available, he urges they be considered for elevation to the Supreme Court and High Courts. The only thing that is remarkable about this is that it needed to be said today 50 years after the Directive Principles of the Constitution were adopted.

It may be that recording hisviews in writing when forwarding his approval of judicial appointments has given some cause for misunderstanding. But this matter can surely be resolved without letting it develop into a full-blown controversy. That must not divert attention from the fundamental issue here. The enormous difficulties in the way of the advancement of the weaker sections of society are plain to see everywhere, in the judiciary, in universities, in the higher echelons of the administration etc. One cannot, in this context, seriously contest the argument that the administration of law and justice is intimately linked to the social philosophy of the judiciary and the social philosophy cannot be entirely separated from the social origins of those who dispense justice. It is perverse to interpret the President8217;s efforts to correct distortions in the system as undue interference or as a political agenda. These are disgraceful allegations. We must, in fact, thank him for urging us to do what we ought to have done long ago.