Contending that judges are responsible for the row that erupted recently over remarks on the judiciary, senior advocate Kapil Sibal has said the NCERT's chapter on 'corruption in the judiciary' was a case of selective targeting of the judiciary as an institution.
He was speaking on the issue of 'Constitutional Morality and the Supreme Court of India: Has the Court Moved from Constitutionalism to Pragmatism?' in conversation with M Ram, Director of The Hindu Group. He added that the chapter had been put in a proper context, also mentioning societal corruption in general, which would not have been an issue.
He added that while teaching young minds about societal corruption is required, highlighting corruption only within the judiciary would make them believe that justice is compromised. At the same time, Sibal said the judges are responsible for this sort of narrative as they have failed to perform their duties consistent with constitutional morality.
He said, "You saw that chapter in a class 8th book. Now, there is no gainsaying that there is corruption in the judiciary. There are some bad pennies everywhere in every institution, which spoils the name of the institution. So, we can't sort of brush it aside under the carpet and say that look, there is no corruption. You can't say that. There is corruption. But how is it that it has suddenly found a place in a class 8th textbook? I ask myself this question: would it have found place in class 8th textbook had the judges performed their duties consistent with constitutional morality. According to me, the judges have brought it upon themselves."
Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi said the NCERT book chapter to him appears to be an ‘agenda to threaten judiciary’. While speaking at an event in Delhi, he remarked that the judiciary's anger and reaction regarding the NCERT textbook issue was being misunderstood. Singhvi pointed out that the anger was only towards the selective highlighting of corruption in the judiciary when it was rampant in many sectors of society, and not speaking anything about dealing with it institutionally.
“I think the reaction or anger is being misunderstood. There can be no two views about the fact that there are black sheep in the judiciary as in every other sector and that the C-word is a major issue, but the problem is selection of the two-page chapter. It suddenly, out of the blue, carries two pages on judiciary,” he said.
Follow us
