The Supreme Court recently dismissed petitions challenging the President’s order appointing advocate L Victoria Gowri as an additional judge of the Madras Hight Court on the recommendations of the Supreme Court Collegium. There have been allegations against her elevation from many corners especially from the leftist propaganda outfits which has peddled false narrative about alleged role of judiciary in being complacent with the government in elevating a person having political affiliation with the ruling party. It was alleged that Gowri had made some hate speeches against minority communities in the past and was affiliated to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
While the case was being heard by the Supreme Court, the Centre had already notified her appointment, and Gowri was administered the oath of office by the Chief Justice of Madras High Court. The Supreme Court however, observed that the collegium would have taken all material against Gowri before recommending her name.
Both the government, who has suggested reform to the system of appointment of judges and the judiciary, who want to preserve the current system of appointment, are caught in the firing line of the ‘Leftist’ propogandist who attacks both the institutions just because their desired candidates aren’t elevated.
These leftist and secular Cabal have a problem with Victoria Gowri because of her ideological and political affiliations. They wouldn’t have gone ballast had the recommended judge belonged to their ilk.
It should be noted that past political links are no bar for becoming a judge and the controversy surround elevation of Victoria Gowri has to be seen as another instance of attack on the institutions of the state by the ‘Left-Liberal’ lobby.
Before breaking down the propaganda against the appointment we must break down how the judges are appointed.
The Appointment Process
In case of High Court Article 217 (2) of the Constitution of India states that:
A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of a High Court unless he is a citizen of India and —
(a) has for at least 10 years held a judicial office in the territory of India; or
(b) has for at least 10 years been an advocate of a High Court or of two or more such courts in succession.
Based on these parameters appointment is made as per the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) a playbook for appointment of judges between the government and the judiciary. It prescribes the mechanism and timeline for appointment of High Court Judges. The proposal to fill up a vacancy should be initiated by the Chief Justice of the High Court and reach the law minister through the governor. The Chief Justice of the High Court will have to indicate if the candidate is associated with any political party, if they have held any organizational or elective office. A system of full disclosure method is followed ensuring transparency to the appointment process.
The Union Law Minister, through government agencies such as Intelligence Bureau, will seek reports on the candidate and send the same to the Chief Justice of India. The Chief Justice of India will obtain views of the Judge(s) of the Supreme Court who are conversant with the state of affairs of the particular High Court.
The Supreme Court Collegium, after gathering the views, will send its recommendation to the Union Law Minister. The Law Minister may send back the names for reconsideration to the Chief Justice of India with specific reasons or put up the file to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister ultimately advises the President for the appointment. While the Constitution of India and the MoP speak of eligibility and procedure, it does not mention that members having political affiliations should not be made judges. Thus, it is clear that there is no legal bar on people with political affiliations becoming judges.
So, what is the problem now? Is it the first time a person with political affiliation is elevated to judiciary? Or the controversy is just because Victoria Gowri had affiliation to BJP?
Politically Affiliated Judges
Below is a list of judges who were politicians prior to or after their appointment.
Justice Baharul Islam was a member of the Congress party. He resigned from the Rajya Sabha to become a judge of the Gauhati High Court. After he retired as Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court, he was recalled and made a Judge of the Supreme Court. He later resigned from the Supreme Court to contest elections and then became a Rajya Sabha member again.
Justice MC Chagla, a legendary judge of the Bombay High Court, formed his own party Muslim Nationalist Party. In 1948, he became Chief Justice of Bombay High Court and remained in that position till 1958. After his stint as a judge, he became the education minister from 1963 to 1966 and the external affairs minister till September 1967.
Justice Hidayatullah was the Chief Justice of India from 1968 to 16 December 1970. He served as the vice president of India for a brief while in 1969 when President Dr Zakir Hussain died. In 1978, he was elected vice president unopposed and served from 31 August 1979 to 30 August 1984.
Justice VR Krishna Iyer became a Supreme Court judge after serving as a minister in Kerala’s Communist Party government. Justice Iyer’s political affiliations and the judgments he had delivered are spoken of even today. In fact, prominent members of the bar, including Soli Sorabjee, had protested Justice Iyer’s appointment to the Supreme Court.
https://twitter.com/governorswaraj/status/1621334483202113537
Then from Tamil Nadu itself there are many instances. Supreme Court Justice Ratnavel Pandian was the former DMK district secretary. Supreme Court Justice Sathasivam was an employee of AIADMK. High Court Judge Chanduru worked as a member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist).
Speaking of character of judges, it is important to elaborate on the allegations levelled against Justice Chandru.
Many would’ve seen and heard about the film Jai Bhim starring actor Suriya, which is based on a custodial violence case handled by Justice Chandru when he was an advocate. In the movie, Justice Chandru has been extolled as a real life hero who fought for the marginalized. However, real life accounts of the case reveal otherwise.
Apparently, Chandru tried to bargain a deal with Anthony Samy (the police officer guilty of beating the ST man to death) for ₹5 lakhs, to ensure that he is not found guilty in the case. However, as Anthony Samy could not give more than ₹2 lakhs, they decided to trap him in the case entirely. This expose has come from Anthony Samy’s very own nephew (sister’s son).
Post his retirement, Justice Chandru has positioned himself as a Dravidian Stockist supporting the DMK. He once made a casteist and misogynist comment against Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman referring to her Brahmin and woman identity.
One shudders to think the kind of justice that Chandru’s pen would have dispensed when he was a judge. But these are subjects the ‘Left-Liberal’ propaganda outfits tend to not talk about.
The Unspoken Spoke Side of Victoria Gowri
Let’s use the same trope which the leftists use to justify the wrongdoings of their ideologues and other controversial episodes – context.
The charges of ‘hate speeches’ against Victoria Gowri has to be seen in the context of her socio-political environment. Victoria Gowri was born and brought up in Kanyakumari, a hotbed of Christian evangelical groups indulging in forced religious conversion. Her formative years have been shaped by the bloody Mandaikadu riots which broke out when fanatic Christians objected to Hindus celebrating their festival and performing rituals in the sea. Even the Venugopal Commission which made a thorough enquiry into the communal riots and recommended a ban on forcible conversions. So, it is but natural for her to voice her concerns about forced religious conversions.
In her early years, she had immersed herself in social work through Seva Bharati (1999-2004) and another NGO ‘Mangayar Mangalam’ (MM, Women Welfare 2004 to 2010). She had worked extensively with Kani community — a forest tribe in the western ghats of Kanyakumari district. Through MM she conducted more than 500 women empowerment camps by working along with women police stations. When Cyclone Okhi inflicted a heavy damage on Kanyakumari, she channelled relief efforts to the needy using her connections. Along with the trustees of the Adivasi People’s Movement, she organised donation drives for the rebuilding of the houses.
In her legal profession, she has handled cases involving Christian institutions. She dealt with the election dispute cases of Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church before High Court. She was even awarded the best lawyer award for the year 2012-2013, by the St Francis Engineering College, (Tirunelveli district of Roman Catholic Diocese).
As for her political affiliation, she left political work to pursue her legal profession years back. For the kind attention of leftists, the BJP is not a banned outfit and being part of it is not a crime. BJP is a party recognized by Election Commission of India just like the Congress or DMK. If a DMK or Communist worker can become a judge, so can a BJP worker.
So, legally and morally there is nothing wrong in the elevation of Victoria Gowri.
The reason for the leftist cabal to oppose Victoria Gowri is that she isn’t one of them and would be a hindrance in using the judiciary for their ulterior motives.
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
