What Lies Behind the Silence of 18 Retired Judges?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a striking turn of events, Law Commission member Hitesh Jain calls out the hypocrisy of 18 retired judges who criticized Amit Shah but remained silent when an advocate questioned the integrity of a sitting Delhi HC judge. This controversy highlights the ongoing struggle for judicial independence amid political agendas.
Key Takeaways
- Selective silence of retired judges raises questions about integrity.
- The G-18's criticism of political remarks highlights judicial independence concerns.
- Political agendas can influence judicial figures' actions.
- The Law Commission aims to reform and simplify the legal system.
- Debates about partisanship continue to shape public perception of the judiciary.
New Delhi, Sep 4 (NationPress) Law Commission member Hitesh Jain raised concerns on Thursday regarding the “selective” silence of a group of 18 retired judges, who had previously criticized Union Home Minister Amit Shah, in light of an advocate questioning the “integrity” of a current judge at the Delhi High Court.
The group of 18 former judges, known as G-18, including ex-Supreme Court Justices Kurien Joseph, Madan B. Lokur, and J. Chelameswar, had last month condemned HM Shah’s remarks which were deemed “pro-Maoism” against Justice B. Sudershan Reddy, the vice-presidential nominee of the INDIA bloc.
Targeting G-18, Jain questioned their reaction on Thursday, asking why they denounced Shah’s statements for possibly undermining the “independence of the judiciary” but chose to remain silent when senior advocate Prashant Bhushan labeled a sitting HC judge’s bail order as “ridiculous” in a post on X.
Jain expressed on X, “The mask has slipped so quickly. When HM Amit Shah criticized Justice Sudershan Reddy after he entered politics, 18 retired judges & activists rushed with an open letter on ‘chilling effect’.”
He questioned the G-18’s silence regarding Bhushan’s comments on the judge’s bail decision, which he deemed “ridiculous”, while also casting doubt on the judge’s integrity.
“The same 18 are silent. Hypocrisy exposed, criticism is selective, partisan, and driven by convenience, not principle. As I’ve always maintained, this lobby runs only on a political agenda,” Jain stated in his message on X.
Previously, Bhushan had criticized the High Court judge directly, referencing the “ridiculous judgment” that denied bail to Umar Khalid and others who have languished in jail for five years without trial.
Bhushan also remarked that the judge “retires today. Waiting to see what post-retirement job… will be given”.
Earlier, the G-18 labeled HM Shah’s “pro-Maoism” accusation against Justice Reddy as a “prejudicial misinterpretation”.
The group asserted that Shah’s comments could have a “chilling effect” on Supreme Court judges, potentially undermining judicial independence.
Following the G-18's open letter, they faced strong criticism from another group of 56 former judges, known as G-56, who argued that their statements were an attempt to mask political bias under the guise of judicial independence.
The G-56 also warned their fellow judges against making frequent political statements.
Jain’s recent post on X has reignited discussions on political partisanship, as highlighted by the G-56.
Jain is a member of the 23rd Law Commission of India, which was formed on September 1, 2024, and will serve until August 31, 2027.
The 12-member commission is tasked with reviewing and proposing reforms in legal matters, focusing on simplifying laws, addressing issues of law and poverty, enhancing judicial administration, implementing Directive Principles of State Policy, and promoting gender equality.
Point of View
I believe that the growing political partisanship among retired judges poses a serious threat to the independence of the judiciary. It is crucial that judicial figures maintain a neutral stance, especially in politically charged environments, to uphold the integrity of our legal system.
NationPress
04/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Hitesh Jain criticize?
Hitesh Jain criticized the selective silence of a group of 18 retired judges regarding an advocate's comments on a sitting Delhi HC judge's integrity.
Who are the members of the G-18?
The G-18 includes prominent former Supreme Court Justices such as Kurien Joseph, Madan B. Lokur, and J. Chelameswar.
What was the context of the criticism against Amit Shah?
The G-18 previously condemned Amit Shah's 'pro-Maoism' remarks aimed at Justice B. Sudershan Reddy, which they believed threatened judicial independence.
What is the role of the Law Commission of India?
The Law Commission is tasked with reviewing and recommending legal reforms, focusing on simplifying laws, improving judicial administration, and addressing issues of law and poverty.
Why is the G-56 important in this context?
The G-56, a group of 56 retired judges, criticized the G-18 for masking political partisanship under the language of judicial independence, emphasizing the need for neutrality.
