Judiciary needs to dig its heels in on the slippery slope of ultra-nationalism to ensure accountability survives

When the words of a sitting Supreme Court judge begin to resemble those of lawyers and retired judges of a certain idealogy, who conflate accountability with anti-nationalism, it is a dangerous sign, writes Rohin Bhatt.

—

THE recent Supreme Court opinion authored by Justice Dipankar Dutta in a case where the petitioners sought 100 percent Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) verification cames as a surprise, to say the least.

First, if one goes to the opinion authored by Justice Sanjiv Khanna, at the end one can see that it is signed by both judges. Yet, Justice Dutta chose to write a separate opinion as well.

Be that as it may, he notes in the third paragraph of his opinion, "Senior counsel or counsel for the three petitioners suspect, without, however, attributing any malice to the Election Commission of India." Yet, two paragraphs later, he goes on an ad hominem attack on the Association for Democratic Reforms.

Subsequently, in paragraph 5, he writes, "It is of immediate relevance to note that in recent years, a trend has been fast developing of certain vested interest groups endeavouring to undermine the achievements and accomplishments of the nation, earned through the hard work and dedication of its sincere workforce.

"There seems to be a concerted effort to discredit, diminish and weaken the progress of this great nation on every possible frontier. Any such effort, or rather attempt, has to be nipped in the bud.

"No constitutional court, far less this court, would allow such an attempt to succeed as long as it (the court) has a say in the matter. I have serious doubts as regards the bona fides of the petitioning association when it seeks a reversion to the old order.