[Reader-list] fwd:An Open Letter to Hon'ble Prime Minister
rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com
Thu Sep 10 11:31:43 IST 2009
Dear Malik jee
I am happy to receive this mail, and feel nice as I respond. Here it is, for
the benefit of all including you:
1) My argument about the Afzal case has no relation to as far as his being
Muslim (or even a Kashmiri) is concerned, though this has been alleged in
many circles. My argument is that for a crime whose charge-sheet itself is
of a dubious nature, it is striking that the Court has sentenced a person to
death on the basis of the same charge-sheet. Therefore, I have my
reservations and I have expressed it. If it would have been a Ram, a Johnson
or a Surjeet Singh, my response would be the same. And the argument too
remains the same.
2) The second problem lies with having greater knowledge and the chances of
its possible misuse. Just because doctors have greater knowledge than us
does not mean that we leave everything to the doctors necessarily. Just
because cricketers know everything about cricket does not mean we should
leave everything to cricketers alone. The reason is that these are people
who are professionals, and since they have a greater knowledge in a
particular field, they can misuse their knowledge to derive profits of their
own at the expense of others or causing harm to others, which can't and
shouldn't be acceptable in any society.
The same is true for Supreme Court judges as well. Just because they know
better about law, does not mean they are the Gods of India. They are also
fallible, and while I agree with you that collective judgment helps in
ensuring this is somewhat rectified, it may not always be true. Hence, they
can fall out, and we should try to get it straight.
Of course, it doesn't mean judges are at fault. They can be misled as well
by the voices of the two lawyers fighting against each other in the court.
And model statements like the court should be partial, are not going to
3) In the name of wrong cases, it is wrong to not apply the RTI to judges,
because this was the same excuse adopted by the Indian bureaucrats right
from top to bottom, and yet it was thrown into the dustbin, precisely
because this is a good excuse of hiding things. If I am not guilty, what
should I be afraid of? And if I feel something has been done wrong against
me, then I have the right to go to court and settle my grievances there.
There are also other modes of protest to account for. And if all this fails,
though it may be wrong, there is also the Maoist dictum of violence to use,
and then be ready to face the consequences, which I may be in such a state.
I agree cases drag on for years and years, and our investigations are
shoddy, but in that case, don't our courts also have to share the blame for
it? Should they be left out of this mess?
As for Sabharwal, if he is not guilty, he shouldn't worry. If he is, then
let's hope he is caught.
More information about the reader-list