On Saturday, calling dissent a “safety valve” of democracy, Apex Court Judge Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, “blanket labelling” of dissent as anti-national or anti-democratic strikes at the “heart” of the country’s commitment to protect Constitutional values & promote deliberative democracy.
Delivering a lecture in Gujarat, Justice Chandrachud also said that the use of state machinery to curb dissent instills fear, which violates the rule of law.
He said that “The blanket labelling of dissent as anti-national or anti-democratic strikes at the heart of our commitment to protect constitutional values & the promotion of deliberative democracy".
Protecting dissent is but a reminder that while a democratically elected government offers us a legitimate tool for development & social coordination, they can never claim a monopoly over the values & identities that define our plural society, Justice Chandrachud said.
Justice Chandrachud was speaking on the topic,” The Hues That Make India: From Plurality to Pluralism,” as part of the 15th Justice P.D. Desai Memorial Lecture.
“Employment of state machinery to curb dissent instils fear & creates a chilling atmosphere on free peace which violates the rule of law & distracts from the constitutional vision of pluralist society,” Justice Chandrachud added.
His comments came at a time when the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) & the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC) has triggered massive protests in many parts of the nation.
Justice Chandrachud said that “The destruction of spaces for questioning & dissent destroys the basis of all growth — political, economic, cultural & social. In this sense, dissent is a safety valve of democracy".
He also said that silencing of dissent & the generation of fear in the minds of people go beyond the violation of personal liberties & a commitment to constitutional value.
Notably, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was part of a bench that had in Jan sought response of the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh on a petition seeking quashing of notices sent to alleged protesters by the district administration for recovering losses caused by damage to public properties during anti-CAA agitations in the state.
Justice Chandrachud opined, “The attack on dissent strikes at the heart of a dialogue-based democratic society & hence, a state is required to ensure that it deploys its machinery to protect the freedom of speech & expression within the bounds of law, & dismantle any attempt to instill fear or curb free speech".
Commitment to the protection of deliberative dialogue is an essential aspect of every democracy, particularly a successful one, Justice Chandrachud said.
Justice Chandrachud added, “A democracy welded to the ideal of reason & deliberation ensures that minority opinions are not strangulated & ensures that every outcome is not a result merely of numbers but of a shared consensus“.
Justice Chandrachud said the “true test” of a democracy is its ability to ensure the creation & protection of spaces where every individual can voice their opinion without the fear of retribution.
“Inherent in the liberal promise of the Constitution is a commitment to a plurality of opinion. A legitimate government committed to deliberate dialogue does not seek to restrict political contestation but welcomes it,” he further said.
Justice Chandrachud also underlined the importance of mutual respect & protection of space for divergent opinions.
He said that “Taking democracy seriously requires us to respond respectfully to the intelligence of others & to participate vigorously, but as an equal in determining how we should live together".
Democracy is judged not just by the institutions that formally exist but by the extent to which different voices from diverse sections of the people can actually be heard, respected & accounted for, the Supreme Court Judge said.
According to Justice Chandrachud, the “great threat to pluralism” is the suppression of differences & silencing of popular & unpopular voices offering alternative or opposing views.
Justice Chandrachud stated that “Suppressionof intellect is the suppression of the conscience or the nation".
The Top Court Judge further said the country was conceptualised“as incorporating its vast diversity & not eliminating it“.
He said that “National unity denotes a shared cultural values & a commitment to the fundamental ideal of Constitution in which all individuals are guaranteednot just fundamental rights but also the conditions for their free & safe exercise".
The country’s pluralism underlines a commitment to protect “the very idea of India as a refuge to people of various states, races, languages & beliefs," he said.
Justice Chandrachud said that “In providing spaces to a multitude of culture & free space to diversity & dissent, we reaffirm to our commitment to the idea that the making of our nation is a continuous process of deliberation & belongs to every individual".
He said that no single individual or institution can claim a monopoly over the idea of India.
He also referred to a “positive obligation” for protecting a plural identity.
Justice Chandrachud said, “The framers of the Constitution rejected the notion of a Hindu India & a Muslim India. They recognised only the Republic of India".
Justice Chandrachud also said the framers put trust on the future generations to create a common bond of what it means to be an Indian, which “shunned homogeneity and celebrated diversity in what is meant to be an Indian“.
He compared the “layered Indian identity” to Matryoshka dolls, & said this is what makes us Indian “and must be central to our understanding of pluralism & efforts to foster it.”
“Homogeneity is not the defining feature of Indianness. Our differences are not our weakness. Our ability to transcend these difference in our recognition of our shared humanity is a source of our strength.
Justice Chandrachud added that “India is a sub continent of diversity in itself. Pluralism has already achieved its greatest triumph — the existence of India. The nation’s continued survival shows us that our desire for a shared pursuit of happiness outweighs the difference in the colour of our skin, the languages we speak, or the name we give the almighty".
Source Link
Picture Source :
