Too dangerous a move by CPM

For all citizens of India, Judiciary system is the most reliable and last source for justice. It may be too costly to get a well known and successful advocate for presenting ones own case. But the judiciary system is always available for rich and poor alike. There is no any kind of discrimination in court, on the base of cast, religion, rich, poor etc.

People of Kerala may have well noticed the dangerous move from CPM leaders that happened after the public statement made by Minister Paloli Mohammed Kutty who belongs to the Communist Party of India. CPM declared that Paloli need not resign despite being found prima facie guilty of committing contempt of court by the High Court. This was followed by an attack by Prakash Karat – general secretary of CPM. Prakash Karat came up with public statements against court. News agencies reported these events as an indication of the decision of CPM to continue “go against court”.

Citizens of India should be too much bothered about this issue I guess. Judiciary is not run by an organization or a political party. Decisions of court always come out as a result of arguments and counter arguments. A particular judgment made by the court may not be true because of the way the particular case is presented. Still the judgment is based on the arguments or evidence provided. It is no way related to who is the ruling judge of the court. It is true that the judgment is made by human and there may be a small percentage of human error, which decreases when the system becomes more experienced and process oriented.

Government decisions always turns to be the decision of the ruling party which will be too much inclined to personal perspective. Many a time, government decisions turned out to be against the will of public of injustice. It was always the judiciary system that came to the relief of the citizens in such case. CPM is well aware of the power of judiciary system that now it is trying to overcome it by shameless and irresponsible public statements. CPM is trying to deface the court in front of the public and trying to make the legislative members beyond the power of court. The extreme extend of this movement will be the demolition of democratic system of our country where any government officials or ministers and legislative members of the government turns out to be monopolist rulers, where the decisions never can be challenged. Communist Party tries to portray the recent happenings as attempt by court to over come the government.

But the shameless leaders should understand that all the citizens cannot be fooled anymore. Judiciary system as such is not run by a group of people who have a common interest of attacking the government or people. CPM is trying to present the court as a political organization in front of the citizens and trying to attack.

Citizens of India may have seen many a time, the ruling government making amendments to the constitution many a time just for the sake of vote bank politics or preserving their power against justice. It is high time the CPM ministers who ever had made such a public statement should resign. The morality of CPM has gone down too much. Judiciary system and Legislative system should go hand in hand and government should be responsible for protecting the belief of public in Judiciary system.

CPM is trying to figure the judiciary system as a political party or organization and trying to deface the belief of public. CPM is trying to make the public agitated against the court. We may not be sure about how far this will go and how many of the public will be the victims this dangerous action. CPM was always in need of so called martyrs (I do respect true martyrs of any party). They always achieved the same by making an unwanted agitation against the government or police or some how. The true fact is that, these martyrs never knew the real cause for which they are agitating, nor do they know whether they were right or wrong. They were just brain washed.

High court of Kerala banded “Bandhs”, then politics in schools and colleges. Not only CPM, but all political parties are still giving public opinions against these verdicts. Any way, even after these bans, “Bandhs” took the form of “Hartals” and continued to disrupt the life of a citizen for a matter which is not at all related to him/her. Students’ politics is one field where political parties can make agitations over any matter, where the young future citizens release tires to release their energy on the command of political leaders but not by ones own will. Even the most fundamental rights of citizens are sometimes not kept during “Hartals” and “Bandhs”. The verdict against these cancers turned to be a huge blow for political parties on their ability to do what ever they wish.

Recent statement by Prime Minister Manmohan Sing, that judiciary activism should not exceed limits may presented in a different way by our ministers. Reservation for OBC cannot be done on the basis of statistical data collected during 1930s. That was the statement made by court while government tired to implement the reservation for O.B.C.s’ in premiere institutions of our country. Can any one find a fault in that statement? India is far different from what India was in 1930s, not even we had freedom then, India was a British colony. Court gave government the option to take the survey of the current situation and implement the law accordingly. This may be the provocation of Manmohan Singh to make this statement.

Some funny explanations by Paloli
When court found that Paloli is guilty, he came with a different explanation of his public statement. But court did not accept his explanation. If court would have accepted his explanation, he would have celebrated the event proclaiming that judiciary has accepted what he told in public. It is strange that he told “1” in public and at the time of trial he explains that he actually meant “2”. How can a minister make such irresponsible statements in public and claim that he meant something different? Again I feel that he is trying to fool the public as well as court at the same time. Will he be having a translator always who explains to the court what he actually meant on any single statement he makes?

Why can’t these ministers express their concerns directly to court for which enough process are existing instead of making public statements that tries to deface the court in front of the public?