The year that was–9 | The year of the Hindutva judge

SPEAKING in the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, Dr B.R. Ambedkar warned the Constituent Assembly about the fact that merely having a Constitution was not enough and that the people had to cultivate a constitutional morality.

He said, “It is perfectly possible to pervert the Constitution, without changing its form by merely changing the form of the administration and to make it inconsistent and opposed to the spirit of the Constitution.

“It follows that it is only where people are saturated with constitutional morality such as the one described by Grote the historian that one can take the risk of omitting from the Constitution details of administration and leaving it for the legislature to prescribe them.

“The question is, can we presume such a diffusion of constitutional morality? Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil, which is essentially undemocratic.”

This year has seen a rise in the number of judges of constitutional courts— tasked with defending the Constitution— who have done a disservice to the Constitution both in letter and spirit. Which is why this year shall probably go down in history as the year of Hindutva judges.

There are, of course, several examples. Former Chief Justice of India Dr D.Y. Chandrachud indulged in a blatant display of faith by inviting Prime Minister Narendra Modi to his residence for Ganesh puja. Justice V. Srishananda of the Karnataka High Court called an area in India ‘Pakistan’ since there was a high number of Muslim residents there.

Justice Shekhar Jumar Yadav is facing an impeachment motion after calling for majoritarian rule in India and referring to Muslims as ‘kathmullas’. Justice Victoria Gowri (of the Islam is ‘Green Terror’, Christianity is ‘White Terror’ infamy) was confirmed as a judge of the Madras High Court despite several instances of hate speech being brought to light in the petition challenging her appointment. Several judges made their way to events hosted by the Adhivakta Parishad, the legal wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

These judges— as Ambedkar said— “invested their words with an amount of terror which would be sufficient enough to cow down any and every opponent of orthodoxy”.

It is clear that the battles of politics have started making their way to courts, and that judges see themselves as players in these battles, either seeking an elevation with the backing of the executive or, perhaps, in some cases a post-retirement sinecure.

An impartial judiciary is the last man standing in the face of orthodoxy as constitutional values come face-to-face with Hindutva. What does it mean to be an Indian?