© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
A sitting judge of a Constitutional court resigning to join politics is not new.
Former Chief Justice of India Koka Subba Rao in 1967 had resigned three months before his retirement to contest Presidential elections as the Opposition candidate against Congress’s Zakir Hussain.
Barely six weeks before his retirement, former SC judge Baharul Islam resigned in 1983 to contest the Lok Sabha elections from Barpeta, Assam, as a Congress candidate.
Yet, Calcutta High Court Judge Abhijit Gangopadhyay’s announcement of his resignation and that he would join politics marks a telling moment in the discourse around the independence of the judiciary.
For one, it comes at a time when the bar in the state is deeply divided, reflecting – and sometimes shaped by – the fault-lines of the state’s politics.
Moreover, for more than two years, both in his judicial orders and in media interviews, Justice Gangopadhyay’s has attacked the ruling Trinamool Congress and its leaders.
His courtroom, too, has been witness to acrimonious exchanges with lawyers questioning his propriety while the judge himself has made allegations against his senior colleagues, accusing one of them of working for “some political party.”
“For Justice Subba Rao, his decision to contest was at a time when the Opposition was looking for credible candidates with unimpeachable integrity to fight the Congress. With Justice Gangopadhyay, one (saw) a questionable judicial temperament, given his interviews, remarks, exchange of barbs with the Bar,” said a former HC judge.
In the Bar, while Justice Gangopadhyay’s announcement comes as no surprise, the response was split.
Senior advocate and Former president of Calcutta High Court Bar Association Arunabha Ghose told The Indian Express that Justice Gangopadhyay’s decision would send a “bad message” about the judiciary.
“When a judge does this, it, of course, sends a bad message. But he was rarely neutral in court which is important for a good judge,” Ghose said.
“What stands out is that, in hindsight, the judge has used the pulpit of the court to drive a political agenda,” a senior advocate said.
Following the SC intervention in January, Justice Gangaopadhyay’s roster was changed on February 4, with some significant matters being taken away from his Court. He was handling labour and industrial disputes. Apart from the Lok Sabha poll schedule, some in the Bar point to this “clipping of wings” to underscore the timing of his decision.
Former Meghalaya High Court Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee also criticised Justice Gangopadhyay’s announcement. “If one has political ambitions, then he must have recused from political cases,” Justice Banerjee said.
Justice Banerjee added that there is no mechanism to deal with judges for crossing the line between judicial discipline and entering politics, while still in office.
“Being honest is not only about monetary aspects. It is also about having a straight backbone and conducting court without political aspirations,” he added.
Advocate Tarunjyoti Tewari, a BJP member and Centre’s counsel in the Calcutta HC, said the TMC was to blame.
“For every order he passed, TMC could have gone in appeal but they first attacked the judge…they relentlessly attacked him,” he said. “He is still a sitting judge so I won’t speculate whether he will join my party. But whichever party he joins, his ability to call a spade a spade will be an asset in politics,” Tewari added.
Former Advocate General and senior advocate Jayanta Mitra told The Indian Express that Justice Gangopadhyay’s decision raises questions about the independence of judiciary.
“It is not in judicial temperament to be hearing cases, deciding for or against the government till a week ago, and then to resign and join politics when elections are announced. It raises questions over the independence of judiciary,” Mitra said.
“It saddens me to see this. In my 55-year practice, I have seen some of finest judges in the Calcutta HC. This sort of divisive nature is new in the Bar and the Bench,” he added.
