Fali Sam Nariman, India’s prominent sentinel on the qui vive for secular values, died aged 95 on Wednesday.
“I have been brought up to think and feel that the minorities, together with the majority community, are integral parts of India. I have lived and flourished in a secular India. In the fullness of time, if God wills, I would also like to die in a secular India,” the eminent jurist wrote in the final chapter of his autobiography Before Memory Fades…
Mr. Nariman was the senior most advocate for independence of judiciary. He would, time and again, highlight in his arguments in the Supreme Court, numerous media interviews and public speeches, that fair and independent judges were a basic feature of the Constitution.
Also Read | Leaders, lawyers condole Fali Nariman’s death
He watched over the Supreme Court and its falter-and-steady trajectory with eyes mellowed by years and a patient heart. Judges looked up to him, and admitted so too.
Sabarimala case
When Mr. Nariman criticised the Supreme Court for converting the Sabarimala case review into a roving enquiry into the essential religious practices of minority religions like Islam and Zorastrianism by a nine-judge Bench, the then Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde agreed he had a “powerful argument there”.
He disapproved of judges “seeking jobs or a seat in the Parliament” from the government. He feared that such post-retirement dalliances affected public faith in judicial sanctity.
God Save the Supreme Court, a book he authored the same year as the unprecedented press conference held by four senior most judges in January 2018, did not mince words. He said what was lacking in the Supreme Court was collegiality among judges.
He conveyed his displeasure to Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia when the latter had sought his assistance to frame restrictive guidelines on the Press covering the Supreme Court.
Champion of free speech
As a citizen, he championed free speech, but made it a point to say “that the Press must serve the governed, not those who govern”.
He had resigned as Additional Solicitor General of India with a one-line letter addressed to the Law Minister after the imposition of censorship during the Emergency.
“Unfortunately, we keep forgetting the ‘of’ part in the ‘of the people, by the people and for the people’. If the government is indeed for the people, it has a solemn obligation to keep the people well-informed,” he once wrote to The Hindu.
The constitutional lawyer poked holes in government claims in court that the National Judicial Appointments Commission was the “will of the people” and the “nation wants it”. “I may be permitted (somewhat impertinently) to ask which nation? The nation of the haves or the nation of the have-nots?... no one has yet devised a reliable method of ascertaining the wishes of the people,” Mr. Nariman quipped.
He criticised the Centre’s “deliberate inaction and delay” over Supreme Court Collegium recommendations. The government, he said, ought to be a “distinguished communicator”.
He took criticism on the chin. To comments that he should never have appeared for the Union Carbide Corporation in the Bhopal gas tragedy civil case, Mr. Nariman said one got wiser (though not necessarily) with age.
Self-deprecatory humour
A raconteur, his stories ranged from his perilous flight from Burma (present day Myanmar) to India as a child to his sharing “half a seat” in the chambers of Sir Jamshedji Kanga as a junior lawyer in Bombay High Court. His wry, self-deprecatory humour usually couched a serious message.
Consider his anecdote of Vice-President B.S. Shekhawat visiting him at home after he won the Padma Vibhushan in 2007 to say “I have come to tell you that my own doctor as well as the President’s doctor was given a Republic Day award”. A telling comment on the system of patronage behind awards, Mr. Nariman, whose tenure as Rajya Sabha member saw him speak up against the killings during the Gujarat riots, mused.
He preferred the Indian version of Lady Justice over the blindfolded Victorian one. “How do you wield the sword of punishment with your eyes deliberately closed? In your blind fury for doing justice, you might strike at the innocent party and not the guilty one!” he wrote.
He succinctly depicted his long association with another jurist, former Attorney General of India Soli Sorabjee, “for a long while we were rivals, later un-friendly rivals, but now, in the evening of our lives, we are friends”.
Enthusiasm to learn
He had a tireless enthusiasm to learn. He surrendered his chambers outside the Supreme Court, preferring to sit in courtrooms to listen and learn, or talk with friends in the court lounge.
On Wednesday, when Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud recalled Mr. Nariman as a “giant intellectual”, a downcast-looking lawyer in the courtroom said Mr. Nariman was finalising his written submissions in an impending Constitution Bench case late last night.
“The race is over, but the work is never while the power to work remains,” he wrote.
He is survived by his son, former Supreme Court judge Justice Rohinton F. Nariman, and daughter, Anaheeta F. Nariman
