Have read all Ayodhya material about 16 times,says Liberhan

Justice Liberhan,on a short private visit to the Capital,is tight-lipped on the contents of his report. But questions about the record-breaking 43 extensions,and the more than a decade-and-a-half that he took to compile a report,make him defensive.

His secretary and he say emphatically that they never asked for an extension on the job,but successive regimes gave the extensions to him,and randomly at that. But what exactly stopped him from not availing of the time handed out,and just submitting his report? It is not a question he likes to answer,saying he wants everyone to wait and read his report once it is tabled in the House,before pronouncing a verdict on him.

His Vaio,Apple Mac and Toshiba 17 inches laptops at home have parts of the now complete Liberhan Commission Report which is lying with the Home Ministry,as action taken is being contemplated on it.

At the moment,Liberhan is a relieved man,reading Supreme Injustice a book on the election verdict in the US Presidential election of 2004 and the Supreme Courts involvement in it. He has just started it,he says,complete with highlights with a yellow highlighter. A copy of John Grishams An Appeal is also waiting to be read. He says that by now,he is used to diligently reading material that needs to be read.

In the commission,as his counsel disassociated himself from the job,he was left without any assistance,he claims,all alone,so he has read and re-read all of the Ayodhya material,not once or twice,but about 16 times.

Does the report end up finding a conspiracy or is it just about an angry mob at work? Liberhan does not answer. But the report,he says,has a section on what he went through,as he wrote it effectively,on what caused the delays. In the past 17 years,India saw a variety of governments,and how each regime created its own special circumstances around it which affected the commission will be listed.

For a person who is otherwise very blunt,he has kept to himself for nearly two decades. But,once the report is tabled in the House he says he will bat on the frontfoot and say it all.

He has been thinking a lot about the judiciary and he laments the fact that much is made about representation these days to caste,creed,language,gender and economic background,but where is talk of representation to merit? Why doesnt anyone talk about that?

Angry at what he sees as publicity-seeking statements,he says: Judges should be known by their judgments,not by their speeches.

He is also annoyed that judges,in his opinion,are spending more time inaugurating functions,attending parties or playing golf,rather than reading briefs,as they should be. He adds: You should just ask judges how many books they have drawn from the Judges Library in their stint. The answer will surprise you.

Liberhan has strong words for judgments that dont these days stop at simply interpreting the law. Why do judges have to impose their opinion and views on us? What is the point of judgments that talk of workers not having the right to form unions,of hanging people publicly,or of a judge talking of how the Gita should dictate life in India?

If a judge is a witness to a murder then he should depose in the witness box,not as a judge go on about the knowledge he has. Judges should not inflict their background on us,or their opinions on various things. They should dutifully interpret the law. That is their job, he says.