Tribune News Service
New Delhi, July 27
Days after the Supreme Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings towards activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan, a bunch of 131 former judges, ex-bureaucrats and activists have come out in his help, terming it as an try at stifling criticism.
The Supreme Court had on July 22 issued notices to Bhushan and Twitter Inc for his tweets allegedly scandalising the Judiciary. Two days later, a Bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had additionally determined to renew listening to in one other contempt of court docket case towards Bhushan pending since 2009. The two instances are listed for listening to on August four and 5.
The group, which included former Supreme Court decide Madan B Lokur, former Delhi High Court Chief Justice AP Shah and a number of other retired bureaucrats and lecturers, appealed to the highest court docket to drop the prison contempt proceedings towards Bhushan.
Describing Bhushan as a relentless crusader for the rights of the weakest sections of society, the group requested the court docket to withdraw the contempt proceedings on the earliest within the “interest of justice and fairness” and to take care of dignity of the court docket.
The signatories to the assertion additionally included creator Arundhati Roy, former Navy chief Admiral L Ramdas, CPI General Secretary D Raja, CPI(M) Politburo member Brinda Karat, former Delhi Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung and RTI activists Aruna Roy, Anjali Bharadwaj and Nikhil Dey, in addition to others.
They mentioned an establishment as necessary because the Supreme Court should be open to public dialogue with out the concern of retribution or motion of prison contempt.
Noting that Bhushan spent his profession in professional bono authorized service to those that did not have prepared entry to justice, they mentioned, “He has fought cases at the Apex Court on issues ranging from environmental protection, human rights, civil liberties, corruption in high places, and has been an outspoken champion for judicial accountability and reforms, especially in the higher judiciary.”
“In the past few years, serious questions have been raised about the reluctance of the Supreme Court to play its constitutionally mandated role as a check on governmental excesses and violations of fundamental rights of people by the state,” the assertion learn.
Questions have been raised by all sections of society, together with media, lecturers, civil society organisations, members of the authorized fraternity, and sitting and retired judges of the Supreme Court, they mentioned.
The group additionally questioned the Supreme Court’s alleged reluctance to intervene in a well timed method to avert the migrant disaster throughout COVID-19 lockdown.