ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Legal experts feel courts could rule on Srikrishna report's acceptance

The people of Maharashtra are free to do what the government of Maharashtra is unwilling to do vis-à-vis the Srikrishna Commission report pinning culpability for the communal riots of December 1992-January 1993, which claimed over a 1000 lives. It can take follow-up action via the courts.

"The rejection is meaningless if the public has accepted the report," said a senior advocate of the Supreme Court, who did not wish to be named. "Anyone can take up the report and file a writ petition in the court, which can then direct the government to act upon certain provisions of the report's findings," he added.

Well-known lawyer Iqbal Chagla seconded the view. "The bar of public opinion must now come into play," he said. "If there are certain factual aspects contained in the report, then a plea can be filed in the Bombay high court for remedial action."

However, the government's rejection of the Srikrishna Commission report is not illegal, since the Commission of Inquiries Act permits the government to reject any report, partly or wholly. And there have been many instances where governments have chosen to play down certain reports for political considerations -- a recent case being the Action Taken Report on the findings of the Jain Commission report.

"But the whole case is morally indefensible," said Chagla, who was not too surprised at what finally happened. "It was to be expected. The entire prelude to the rejection was orchestrated by allegations of a bias and the fear of an outbreak of communal violence."

Chagla said the sad part was that five years of conscientious labour on the part of Justice Srikrishna, a judge in the Bombay high court, has been nullified by the government.

The Srikrishna report has indicted the Shiv Sena and its top leaders, including Bal Thackeray, and the state government has been sitting on the report for many months, seeking one way or the other of delaying it. Many hold the Sena responsible for the gruesome violence that broke out in Bombay in December 1992 and January 1993, which began after the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was destroyed. The Shiv Sena was then in the opposition, but won the subsequent elections in March 1995 in alliance with the Bharatiya Janata Party, to form the government.

There have been concerns at the frequent rejection of reports and calls for making their acceptance mandatory. Chagla, however, is not too sure that is the answer. "Some reports are extremely biased and partisan and hence, must be rejected," he said. "But the way out, I feel, is that any commission involving a high court judge or above must be accepted by the authorities concerned."

Both the advocates also spoke highly of Srikrishna's calibre and integrity. "I know Srikrishna quite well, and don't think he'll say anything incorrect," said the Supreme Court advocate.

"The irony is that Srikrishna is a god-fearing Hindu, who leaves his religion within the confines of his home and never carries it to work," declared Chagla.

One can now expect another round of judicial activism on the Srikrishna report. "Whenever the government misbehaves or is led by political considerations, the judiciary steps in, and this can well be another case," said the Supreme Court advocate.

Tell us what you think of this report