Tirade follows PCI report targeting Bihar press freedom, Katju’s opinion piece against Modi
Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley has demanded the resignation of Press Council of India (PCI) chairman Justice Markandey Katju, accusing him of selectively targeting non-Congress governments and being “more Congress than Congress.”
In a written statement, Mr. Jaitley has charged Justice Katju with indulging in “political activity” while occupying a quasi-judicial office and said that he should be sacked if he did not voluntarily quit.
Mr. Jaitley’s tirade is based on a draft report released by the Press Council of India on the state of media freedom in Bihar and an opinion piece in The Hindu (on February 15) by the Press Council chief attacking Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.
The senior Opposition leader’s case is that Justice Katju is “extraordinarily soft on those who provided him a post-retirement job” and exercises “self-censorship” on issues related to the UPA’s corruption, from the 2G spectrum allocation to the coal block allocation.
In support of his argument that Justice Katju is politically partisan, Mr. Jaitley cited the concluding paragraph of his article, in which the PCI chief said that those who wished to see Mr. Modi rule the country could be making the same mistake the Germans made in 1933.
“I concede to Justice Katju the right to hold his political views, but can the occupant of a job whose functioning is quasi-judicial openly participate in political activity. His appeal is political. He appears to be more Congress than the Congress party,” Mr. Jaitley said.
The Bharatiya Janata Party leader charged that Justice Katju had failed every test on which a judge, whether sitting or retired, could be judged and the choice of his subjects and targets was motivated by his political preferences. “He is extraordinarily soft on those who provided him a post-retirement job. I am yet to read a comment from him which prefers meritocracy over dynasty as an instrument of leadership creation.”
On the PCI draft report on the Bihar media, Mr. Jaitley said Justice Katju targeted Nitish Kumar and the State government for its lack of press freedom when confronted with favourable comments by large sections of the domestic and international community praising the change of polity in Bihar and the emergence of development as the central agenda of politics.
On the questions raised in The Hindu article on the burning of the Sabarmati Express in Godhra and its aftermath, Mr. Jaitley asked, “Is Justice Markandey Katju trying to hold a brief for those who have been convicted for setting the train on fire resulting in the death of innumerable people and injuries to many others. Can a former judge of the Supreme Court presently holding a statutory assignment ignore the fact that the trial court has convicted a large number of accused in the case and their appeals are pending?
“He then comments on the fact that Narendra Modi has not been prima facie held liable by any judicial authority. He prefers bazaar gossip over judicial verdicts and observes, ‘I do not want to comment on our judiciary but I certainly do not buy the story that Shri Modi had no hand in 2002’[riots].”
Mr. Jaitley has accused Justice Katju of selectively quoting statistics on development-related issues and social indices in Gujarat.
The senior BJP leader said judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts must not be eligible for jobs in the government after retirement and claimed that in some cases the pre-retirement judicial conduct of a judge was influenced by the desire to get a post-retirement assignment.
“If a sitting judge of the Supreme Court participated in politics so openly and issued a political appeal, he would be liable for impeachment. If a civil servant did the same, he would be liable to be dismissed from service.
“Should not a former judge who currently occupies a quasi-judicial office as Chairman of the Press Council of India either quit before actively participating in politics or be sacked. Retired judges must remember that the rental for occupying a Lutyens’ bungalow post-retirement has to be political neutrality not political participation,” he said.
Keywords: Narendra Modi, 2002 Gujarat communal violence, Narendra Modi government, religious freedom, Markandey Katju, Katju article, ArunJaitley
The editor,Sir on some occasions my online comments are displayed and on
many occasions they are not displayed.I have shown my comments to some of
my friends who have confirmed that the comments were never
offensive.Probably you select and publish on line.Some section of the
media publish the readers' views quickly,some instantaneously.Some
section of the media even acknowledge receipt of readers comments along
with the reaction thereon.I feel that the Hindu should treat the readers
impartially.May I suggest that if you are not accepting the comments the
reader can be informed.Come on Sir,let us play fair game.Let us move
forward.Readers are part of the system.
The Hindu's lopsided coverage of Justice Katju has been quite apparent since his installation
as Chairman of the PCI. Neither has he done justice to the organisation he now heads or the
facts of the Gujrat riots. Further he has undermined the organisation he once served, our
Judiciary, by suggesting the criminals convicted by due process have been framed. How else
can one interpret his 'mystery' over Godhra comment? Lastly, if Justice Katju is aspiring for
Political office he should have
the decency to resign from the publicly funded Press Council of India. One can only imagine
what sort of twisted perception has taken root in his mind to compare India with Nazi
Germany.
It has become a regular practice for this paper to *censor* the comment section rather than
moderate it. Then fact being comments submitted which are not personal but critical in their
assessment of Mr. Katju ( whom The Hindu has consistently been supporting since his
proposal for regulation of the broadcasters) are not being published. Instead, the editors of
this "august" newspaper post lame, inaccurate, strange critics of Mr. Katju thus ensuring the
'balance' of opinion is 'represented', albeit by in a screwed fashion. This is an unfortunate
turn for The Hindu & one for which I shall not hesitate to cancel my subscription to your
newspaper in the near future.
It is the full right of Justice Katju to air his views and the BJP
through its corporate lawyer Jaitley has lost all moral authority to
criticise Justice Katju. What the former Judge said is nothing but
truth and reflects the sentiments of scores of people who are waiting
to get justice from the court. The whole world knows that it is killer
Modi through his gang indulged in rioting, looting, raping and killing
of innocent Muslims in Gujarat which can be compared only with the
ethnic cleansing of the Jews in Germany and the Tamils in Srilanka
under Mahinda Rajapakse.
Still the truth is evading as to the identities of the passengers
killed in the Sabarmati express. Neither the media nor anybody talks
of these people. Can Jaitley reveal the names of those people who were
killed in the train? It is like hiding the identity of parliament
attackers. Jaitely has to shut his mouth.
It’s amazing! A freedom for press does not applicable to freedom of
press leader. Arun Jaitley’s defense is laughable. Better he answer to
Justice Katju’s facts, rather asking why he does not question Congress
ruled states. Will Jaitley agree to these entire allegation if,
Justice Katju go hard against Congress ruled states? I look forward,
Jaitley to re-write his article with point by point refute with
evidence. I miss articulate and persuasive Jaitley from this article.
Jaitley should remain as one of the notable intelligent as in the
past, rather seeking limelight through such rythmatic but meaningless
expression.
@Lakshmi Narayana. Justice Katju is not an opposition leader in the AP assembly to raise your grouse. You should ask this question with opposition parties in AP, about what the government is doing there.
I am not surprised with the arrogance of Jaitley here. When at Karnataka and other states where BJP party is at rule are mired with corruption and nepotism, Jaitley chose either to ignore them or support the rogue Reddy brothers. What kind of morality does Jaitley has to question Justice Katju's integrity, when many BJP politicians are still occupying many of Lutyen's bungalow's in Delhi, despite their tenure in government has ended.
Jaitley has to remember that expenses of all government machinery and infrastructure are paid from tax payers money, not from Jaitely's pocket. It becomes obvious here, if BJP comes to power, what has to come, given the facts, that BJP and its leaders are having that seven year itch. Thanks God, BJP is equally corrupt to Congress and has an edge infact!
The argument put forth by Lakshminarayana is illogical. If one comments on something, why should he be required to comment on each and everything on earth? The fact of the matter is that BJP and its leaders are frustrated because state power seems to be receding farther and farther. It is the second time their president has been mired in corruption. They have lost power in UK, HP and Jharkhand and are sure to lose it in Karnataka. In spite of all the hype,Modi lost two seats and, earlier, in UP they failed to keep their score intact despite embracing Kushwaha, a symbol of corruption. BJD, TDP, etc. have gone out of the fold of NDA. Nitish will also leave some time or the other. The attempt to rope in the Sant samaj at Kumbh has miserably failed in spite of misleading propaganda by corporate controlled electronic media. BJP is riddled with factionalism. Thus its prospectus are bleak. The present day youth cannot be roped in by its agenda of Ram Mandir and Modi's agenda.
Justice Katzu is just trying to achieve *Instant Secularism* by
criticizing Modi beyond his role of PIC Chairman. He is in the habit
of penning his biased and inappropriate views of late. Commenting on
sub-judice matters with such audacity is deplorable. No wonders if we
see him contesting election on the Congress ticket in the coming
elections, so he is preparing the ground for that. Those people who
for the sake of sounding "secular" talk about post-Godhra riots and
forget the Godhra incident which triggered the riot are doing an
injustice to Indian community.
Mr. Katju's various interventions in public debate can at best be described as haphazard,
intellectually inconsistent & most of all- self defeating. Attempts to censor the Press on behalf
of the Congress run Government via a new 'Media Council' have fallen wayside, despite
countless attacks on the broadcasters & newspapers. Justice Verma, amongst others, was
erudite in unmasking the intentions of the proposed legislation. The Hindu sadly has
supported this misadventure against freedom of expression. Now, by providing a platform of
dissent against the Judicial Process ( which incedently has cleared the Gujrat CMs name) by
a former Supreme Court Judge, this newspapers must go a step further and urge Mr. Katju
to relinquish his statuary office and appear in a review petition before his fellow brethren to
challenge the findings of the SIT.
I agree with most views expressed by Justice Katju. I also believe that
Justice Katju has the right to give his opinion as a former Justice of
the Supreme Court and as the Chairman of Press Council of India. Mr.
Jaitly should understand that Justice Katju has not opined only about
Gujarat, but he has criticized rightly about Congress ruled States of
Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh and others. As a chairman of PCI he
fulfilled an excellent duty of "Fourth Estate".
First of all this PTI report deserves commendation for ignoring pompous prefixes and mentioning it in simpe terms. In the changing hightec world scenario, pomp show prevalent in undeveloped states is ludicrous. In India political culture is very bad and needs a lot of improvement qualitatively. People should expect a lot of truths and untruths getting unfolded in the run upto 2014 elections. Maturity of people alone can save them from Corruption, mismanagement,poverty and illiteracy for a bright future for India's leadership.
At last some body has reminded this jurist of the responsibility of his
present assignment.Our country has enough self seeking politicians what
is lacking is an impartial and able regulator.For god's sake Mr Kadju
stop preaching. All we want is action.
Mr. Katju had said that “there is still a mystery of what happened in Godhra” and he found it hard to believe “that Modi had no hand in 2002”, referring to the Gujarat riots. Why Shree Katju as Supreme Court Judge at the time had not made his doubt clear and unambiguous as a judge. Unfortunately, he wants to be outsmart by writing in his capacity some unwarranted matters on subjects for which he feels he has doctorate degree. It is better“The Chairman of the Press Council discharges a statutory job. His job requires fairness, impartiality and political neutrality. Additionally a Judge, whether sitting or retired, is expected to conduct himself with sobriety, dignity and grace.
Justice Katju is one of the most secular judges to have sat on the
panel of judges at the Supreme Court. He is entitled to hold a
political view which suits to his sensibilities and his moralities in
his personal life. But at the same time his article on Narendra Modi
was a little off the track. Given that the statutory position he holds
he should have exercised a little restrain on his temper while penning
views which he himself wrote was sub-judice. Narendra Modi maybe or
maybe not a person culpable of genocide that is for the court to
decide. By openly writing such an article it can be equally argued
that judges do pass certain decisions which are in consonance with
their own belief and has nothing to do with truth and transparency and
the procedure established by law!
Mr Katju criticism of modi government and his policies will easily be
interpreted as political though his comments might be factual. As long
as he is holding an constitutional office he should exercise restraint
in making comments unrelated PCI jurisdiction and have political
implications. He attacked modi clearly in light of some sections
pitching him for PM candidate of BJP in 2014 elections. Many sections
perceive Rahul Gandhi as PM candidate of congress. Can he write an
article on UPA-2 governance and rahul gandhi's suitability for the top
post similar to the one on modi? By making an appeal not to vote for
modi clearly he has taken a stand and hence he should quit from the post
of PCI.
It appears to me, who is a regular reader of your news paper, that Justice Katju's comments are biased as he never spoke about the weekly scams during the current regime nor the utter lawless administration of my home state of Andhra Pradesh wherein the common man is suffering silently.
Please Email the Editor