A dissenter is not an anti-national. Holding a contrary view to that of the government does not make one an anti-national, Supreme Court judge Justice Deepak Gupta said on Monday.
“Criticism of the executive, the judiciary, the bureaucracy or the armed forces cannot be termed ‘anti-national’. In case we attempt to stifle criticism of the institutions, we shall become a police state instead of a democracy....To question, to challenge, to verify, to ask for accountability from the government is the right of every citizen...”, he said.
Justice Gupta’s speech at a lecture organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association on 'Democracy and Dissent' received standing ovation.
Justice Gupta red-flagged the hike in sedition cases against activists, lawyers and students and branding voices of dissent as “anti-nationals”. Expressing dissent to government's policies did not amount to acting against the nation.
“There have been many recent incidents where people dissenting have been slapped with terms like anti-national... Majoritarianism is an anti-thesis to democracy... ”, he said.
Any attempt to quell dissent would have a chilling effect on the democracy as "governments are not always right" and those opposing it couldn't be labelled anti-national said Justice Deepak Gupta.
He said the majoritarianism was anti-thesis to democracy. "There have been recent incidents where people were called anti-national because they dissented from the government," he said.
"If some party gets 51 per cent vote, does that mean the other 49 per cent shouldn't speak for 5 years? Every citizen has a role to play in a democracy. Governments are not always right," Justice Gupta said.
Stating that just because someone takes a contrarian view it doesn't mean disrespect to the country, he said, "Whenever there is a clash of ideas, there will be dissent. Right to question is an inherent part of democracy."
Justice Gupta said the Opposition had the right to protest as long as peaceful means were used. He also cited excerpts from a lecture by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud that said, "The blatant labelling of dissent as anti-national stops deliberative democracy."
He said democracy was considered successful when it protected the citizens' rights. "Dissent has an important role, it should be encouraged. It leads to finding better ways to run the country," he remarked.
Justice Gupta also said he disapproved Bar associations passing resolutions refusing to represent certain persons accused of certain charges (especially, where the police had booked someone for anti-national activities). "It's against the legal ethics," he said.
On the dissent of judges on a Bench while passing judgement, Justice Gupta said there were some judgments where he would disagree as it was his opinion as an individual. "But when I am sitting in a Division Bench, I am bound by the judgment given by it," he said.
Recalling Justice H.R. Khanna's dissent in the ADM Jabalpur case, he termed it the "most important dissent" in the country. Justice Khanna told his sister he knew he would end up losing his job due to the judgement, the judge said and added, he was next in line to become the Chief Justice.
Stating that the judiciary should be fearless and independent, Justice Gupta said the right to dissent, also included the right to criticise and the judiciary too was not above criticism.
He also spoke about Justice D.Y. Chandrachud's dissent in the Aadhar case and Justice Indu Malhotra's dissent in the Sabarimala temple case, and termed them as two recent and very important dissents.
Justice Gupta, however, refrained from making a comment as the matter is under judicial scrutiny.
READ FULL SPEECH HERE:
Source Link
Source Link
