After the conclusion of lengthy proceedings in which voluminous evidence was produced and extensive oral arguments were advanced,the Allahabad High Court reserved judgment in the Ayodhya matters which was scheduled for pronouncement on 24/09/2010. It is heartening that Hindu and Muslim organisations have made fervent appeals that the High Court judgment,whichever way it goes,should be accepted by the parties,subject to an appeal in the Supreme Court. Fortunately,the prevailing atmosphere at present is not surcharged as was the case in 1992. A belated application for deferment of judgment filed by one R.C. Tripathi was rejected by the High Court. Surprisingly,a division bench of the Supreme Court interfered and stayed delivery of the judgment till 28/09/2010,apparently in the hope that parties would arrive a settlement in the brief period of one week. Settlement of any litigation is desirable and especially the pending litigation. But when the main contesting parties have expressed their inability to settle the suits despite several past attempts,realistically settlement appears hopeless. But remember,hope springs eternal in the human breast and judges,all said and done,are human. Besides,miracles do occur. Perhaps that was the impelling motivation of the Supreme Court order. What will happen on September 28 when the Supreme Court hears the matter? No guesses. Bookies are already offering odds and taking bets.
Lord Bingham is no more
UN vindicates whistleblowers
Whistleblowers who blow the lid are detested by the establishments they expose. It is heartening that a UN Dispute Tribunal has vindicated a whistleblower,Artjon Shkurtaj,who served as chief of operations for UN operations in North Korea in the mid-2000s. Shkurtaj was outraged by the scandal-ridden operations and after unsuccessfully urging his superiors at the UNDP headquarters in New York to take corrective measures conveyed information to the US mission to the UN.
The UNDP responded by dismissing Shkurtaj and maligned his integrity. Three years later the UN Dispute Tribunal vindicated Shkurtaj and ordered the UNDP to pay its former employee $166,000 in compensation. Judge Memooda Ebrahim-Carstens ruled that UNDP violated Shkurtajs due process rights,damaged his career prospects and professional reputation,and caused him emotional distress. It is open to the Secretary-General to appeal the decision. However,it would be fitting if Shkurtajs courageous action of alerting the UN to instances of wrong-doing is appreciated and he is reinstated.
