So what do you think of judiciary?
Well, I would come to Indian judiciary in due course but overall, when you see what’s presently happening in Pakistan and in the United States, it does appear the long arm of justice has been let loose on politically dangerous entities who go by the names of Imran Khan and Donald Trump.
All kind of charges have been nailed on Imran Khan from waving a classified paper to crowd, to putting him in jail or stopping from taking part in general polls. Likewise Donald Trump is being hauled everyday in US courts and you guess the idea is to wreck him before the presidential elections in November.
What it conveys is that the judiciary is on steroids to nail these two gentlemen in election-time and since judges don’t contest elections, they arguably are doing it at somebody’s behest, call it “Deep State” if you must.
What is a “Deep State”?
“Deep State” are the forces which control a society and a nation and which isn’t necessarily the government in power.
This “Deep State” controls a nation with the organs it has embedded in a system. It’s layered; from media to NGOs who are selective on “human rights”; and for a more direct intervention it has political parties, judiciary etc who do their bidding.
In international terms, the “Deep State” is understood to be beholden to the United States who stir up whenever a nation is perceived to be not in sync with the Hegemon’s goals.
This “Deep State” is stuffed with chokeful of bribes and threats, the tin soldiers, meant to destroy a country which is growing independently of the United States.
A nation growing on its own is a No-No for the United States
xxx
So on India.
Let’s discuss what Our Lordships decided against Electoral Bonds yesterday.
They have struck down the law on it, claiming that hiding the donors’ identity is violation of Constitution; that the SBI and the Election Commission must hang them out to dry by March 13 and yes, you guessed it right, all this just in time before the 2024 General Polls are held in our country in April-May.
So yes, one is inclined to think this alacrity on the part of our Lordships is with an eye that it spills over on the General Polls.
In this rush, a few contestable points have been overlooked which you could be sure your corrupt media would never raise or they would have framed a few questions to our judiciary in this manner:
Your Lordships, suppose I, a corporate donor, was encouraged to politically donate to the party of my liking due to the legislation which assured my anonymity.
I made a donation in cheque, didn’t resort to cash-suitcases which had been the practice in this country; it established that I am a tax-payer; and that like any other citizen, I was involving myself in the political future of my country.
The guarantee of anonymity ensured I had the peace of mind that I won’t be subjected to political witch-hunting in case the ruling dispensation changed in Centre.
Now it seems that not just I or my company would suffer but also that I would be tool through which political scores could be settled by, let’s say the “Deep State.”
xxx
This is one dimension of Indian judiciary’s stance on electoral bonds.
The other way of looking at it is how inconsistent is Indian judiciary with its inclinations;
Just before the Punjab Polls, Indian prime minister Narendra Modi toured Punjab where a security breach opened him and his cavalcade to potentially fatal attack.
India’s prime minister was left-stranded on a bridge, around a bustling market, because the farmers had blocked the road ahead, and the local police and security had left their prime minister to his own fate.
Luckily nothing happened but when this matter was brought to the Supreme Court, our judiciary promptly appointed a one-man commission with no time-limit!: No such stipulation that this breach must be investigated and made public before the Punjab Polls!
This dire matter was thus allowed to meet a slow death.
xxx
Likewise, one remembers the post-poll violence against Hindus by the Trinamool Congress in 2021 which led to a strong condemnation by the Human Rights Commission and yet no such pangs of “human rights” or “constitutional violation” was visible on the part of our judiciary. Similar transgressions on human rights and lives are once again visible in Mamata”s Bengal.
Yet we saw our judiciary double down on an official’s decision in the mayor poll of Chandigarh recently which the BJP won and its opposition lost. All by what judiciary perceived about the official on the basis of a video.
When Uddhav Thackeray and his son at helm in Maharashtra were physically settling matter with disagreeing public or a prominent journalist, one didn’t see the judiciary rise to their defence with any urgency. No such “human rights” or “freedom to press” rendered the air.
During Farmers’ Protest at the height of the Covid pandemic, the judiciary appointed a three-member committee to report its findings back to the Supreme Court which the committee duly did but the Supreme Court never made it public or took any action on it. The committee was appointed in January 2021, it reported back its findings by March 2021 which, as was later learnt, supported the farm laws. The Centre repealed the farms laws in November 2021 following which the farmers ended their protest.
xxx
So one does feel that some “human rights” matter more to our Lordships than some others. Like it was with Nupur Sharma who has been condemned to a life of ignominy, fear, disrepute because nobody stood by her and one honourable judge went ballistic against her based less on cold legal facts but on his own prejudice.
Thus in this “electoral bonds”, the judiciary has taken into account the rights of the voters to know yet ignored the rights of those donors who were legally protected by anonymity. The judiciary may now find fault with the government and the latter could accuse the Lordships of riding roughshod over a law which is the preserve of the legislature but in the end where does it leave donors? Who not impose your ruling prospectively instead of doing it retrospectively?
Meanwhile the vile media is going to town that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has a big slice of 57 per cent of all donations emerging out of electoral bonds. All they forget, and don’t mention, is that such donations are natural if a political party is in power over 58% of India and 57% of its population.
So what do I think this electoral bond judgement would play out in the Indian general polls in April-May? Well, I think it’s cast in stone that the Modi government would return to power with possibly with an even bigger majority—unlike what the “Deep State” has managed to achieve in the case of Imran Khan and possibly with Donald Trump.
