Justice SK Kaul’s Reflections on Article 370 Verdict
In a candid conversation with NDTV, Justice SK Kaul, a recently retired judge from the Supreme Court of India, shared his views on the contentious verdict regarding Article 370. He stated,
“I believe that if five judges have taken a unanimous decision then at least it is the opinion of these judges that what was done was correct and in accordance with the law.”
This statement underscores the bench’s consensus on the legal standing of the decision.
Also read-Justice SK Kaul Raises Concerns Over Bail Practices In Indian Judiciary (lawchakra.in)
The verdict, which has stirred diverse reactions, particularly in the Kashmir Valley, was seen by many as a disappointment. Justice Kaul, acknowledging the complexity of the issue, remarked,
“The people are entitled to a different opinion of it, so what.”
He emphasized that the decision to revoke Article 370, while a political one, stood on firm legal grounds.
Justice Kaul also touched upon the emotional and societal aspects of the Kashmir issue, especially concerning the Kashmiri Pandits. He expressed a need for acknowledgment of past sufferings, drawing a parallel with the South African model of reconciliation.
“There is a legal aspect, and a societal aspect. There should be an end to this conflict. 4.5 lakh people were compelled to migrate. Their story was never told. If we have to proceed further, it is necessary to acknowledge there is something wrong,”
he said, highlighting the importance of recognizing and addressing historical injustices.
Insights on Judiciary-Executive Relations in India
In an interview with India Today, Justice Kaul offered an in-depth analysis of the dynamics between the judiciary and the executive in India. He observed,
“There is always a little turf war that occurs… Whenever there have been coalition governments, the judiciary may have forayed a little ahead. Whenever strong governments are there, the pushback has been more.”
This comment reflects the fluctuating balance of power depending on the political climate.
Also read-Supreme Court Forms Committee For Streamlining Adjournment SOP (lawchakra.in)
Speaking on the government’s role in judicial appointments, Justice Kaul noted,
“They want to play a bigger role, certainly. They feel they are entitled to play a bigger role because they have been elected with a large mandate.”
He acknowledged the government’s desire for a more significant say in the process, given its strong electoral backing.
Regarding the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), Justice Kaul believed it could have been modified to address concerns about government overreach. He suggested,
“My thought is that the Chief Justice should have been given a casting vote. It could have tweaked the problem.”
Addressing criticisms of the Collegium system, particularly around transparency and favoritism, Justice Kaul remarked,
“We can’t sit in a glass house and appoint judges.”
He defended the system’s process, involving consultations and intelligence inputs, while acknowledging the need for improvements in the timeliness of appointments.
Conclusion: A Comprehensive Perspective on Legal and Political Challenges
Justice SK Kaul’s interviews provide a rich and detailed perspective on key legal and political issues in India. His comments on the Article 370 verdict offer a blend of legal reasoning and empathetic understanding of its societal impact. Similarly, his insights into the judiciary-executive dynamics reveal the complexities of power play and the challenges in maintaining judicial independence and integrity in a vibrant democracy. These reflections are crucial for understanding the nuanced interplay of law, politics, and society in contemporary India.
Also read-Kashmir, I Plan To Spend A Lot Of Time In, Justice Sanjay Kaul. (lawchakra.in)
