Supreme Court smacks down Swamy: “Who are you?”

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by nrj, Apr 3, 2013.

  1. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Subramanian Swamy got rapped on his knuckles for stealing the Supreme Court’s glory by taking credit for the return of the Italian marines. But he doesn’t seem to have learnt the required lesson.

    “The original plan was that Marines would not return, Ambassador would be expelled and Italy will not expose ‘the family’,” tweeted a triumphant Subramanian Swamy when the Italian government announced its decision to send back the awol Italian marines. “Had I not turned up in SC and asked for restraining the Amb and an exchange of hot words with CJI, the matter would have…” he claimed, leaving his loyal Twitter brigade to perform the assigned task of granting credit where it was most undue. Thus it was that the Hindu right added a new tale of Swamy sorcery to its lore: Swamy’s PIL forced the Supreme Court to take action against the Italian ambassador, which in turn created the needed leverage to bring Rome to its knees. And everyone lived happily ever after etc.

    That’s until the Chief Justice of India decided to rain on Swamy’s victory parade.

    The smackdown was delivered in the courtroom soon after the bench rescinded the ban preventing the Italian Ambassador Daniele Mancini from leaving the country. The move spurred Swamy into action, and eagerly remind the Court of his now legendary contempt application against the Italian envoy. CJI Altamas Kabir’s response was not quite as anticipated, as the Telegraph reports:

    “Who are you?” the Chief Justice asked Swamy, who said he had moved the contempt application. “I am asking you, who are you?” the judge responded. “I am sorry you are not an advocate. You have no right to appear. You have no right to argue. What will happen if any person on the road comes and says I want to argue. You might have done it earlier, but we will not allow you.”

    In a nation where “Do you know who I am?” is the ultimate assertion of power, that’s pretty much the mother of all insults. But Kabir wasn’t finished downgrading Swamy. He went on to order him out of the front row, which is “meant for lawyers, not for litigants. You have no right to sit there”.

    Declared a nobody and ordered out of the VIP seats! Surely enough cause to scream conspiracy, and so Swamy predictably did: ”There is a collusion here,” he declared. The proclamation did little to endear him to an already irate judge, leaving Swamy with only one way out — as in, right out of the courtroom.

    The moral of this mini melodrama: Never rob a Supreme Court judge. Chief justices don’t take kindly to anyone stealing their judicial glory.

    The lesson, however, seems to have been lost on Swamy who soon took to Twitter to restore his eroded position. “I don’t mind being insulted by CJI for defending the honour of Bharat Mata,” he first declared, but soon dialled up the rhetoric, egged on by his supporters.

    When @actindia claimed, “CJI Altamas Kabir actually want to scare-off Dr Subramanian @Swamy39, so that the corrupt dynasty’s future can be secured,” Swamy replied, “But had the opposite effect,” implicitly endorsing the original slur. A couple of tweets later, he moved on to directly accusing the Court of bad faith: “The failure of the SC to list or reject formally my Contempt Petition despite bringing it to the notice of the court is serious miscarriage.”

    For a high-profile troublemaker like Swamy, heaping invective on heads of politicians is a low-risk strategy. None of his favourite targets is likely to sue him for libel — which will only give him the flood of attention he craves. But tweaking your nose at Supreme Court justices is a dangerous sport, more so for a one-man party who relies on his legal talent to stay in the limelight. If it chooses to, the highest court has plenty of perfectly legal ways to shut Swamy out — or, if sufficiently irate, shut him up. Chief justices can be notoriously thin-skinned about insinuations questioning their integrity, as Indian media outlets have discovered in recent years. Tweeting tall tales is a fine pastime, as long as it doesn’t end in a suo motu contempt petition of the wrong kind.

    Supreme Court smacks down Swamy: “Who are you?” | Firstpost
     
  2.  
  3. GPM

    GPM Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,510
    Likes Received:
    506
    So only lawyer can argue their cases. A citizen cannot come and argue, but must hire a lawyer.

    Is SC for lawyers or Citizens? Is it a court of justice or debating forum for lawyers?

    By uttering "man on the road" he belittled the high office he holds.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2013
    jackprince and parijataka like this.
  4. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Litigators can not stand on lawyer's bench and harp their argument. There are rules and procedure. Without them there will be chaos. Swamy was acting idiot.
     
    Singh, Ankit Purohit and sayareakd like this.
  5. SLASH

    SLASH Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    458
    Swamy over estimates himself and thinks he can have his way any how he wants. This was required.
     
  6. GPM

    GPM Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,510
    Likes Received:
    506
    Const. gives right to justice equally to a man on road or in a palace. That right cannot be trampled upon by any rule. Every litigant has a right to conduct his own case, be it criminal, civil or constitutional.
     
  7. Coalmine

    Coalmine Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    475
    Likes Received:
    319
    Location:
    India
    This only happens when katju types are given positions.
     
    brain_dead likes this.
  8. GPM

    GPM Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,510
    Likes Received:
    506
    Kabir seems to be a Katju in making.
     
    brain_dead likes this.
  9. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    You are right but things are different in this case, plus one more thing if i argue a case in Hon'ble SC, my arguments will be heard but it wont become part of record. Judgment will be passed by the Hon'ble SC based on what is their on record. Reason you need AOR to put arguments on record, as per SC rules.

    As far as case is concern SC has interpreted Article 32 to allow citizen to move to SC for violation of Fundamental rights even on letter written to CJI or SC.

    Swamy was abusing the PIL for his own purpose and fame, so he got the beating.

    Earlier also SC has impose heavy cost on PIL with malice or made by interested parties.
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2013
    nrj, Singh, pmaitra and 1 other person like this.
  10. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    Point is that you cant allow people take advantage out of PIL to fulfill their own interest and take undue credit.
     
  11. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    front Chairs are reserved for lawyers and back two rows are reserve for litigants. Lawyers are officers of the court and Court need them to assist in discharge of Justice.
     
  12. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,281
    Location:
    BANGalore
    As far as I know, you can argue your own case.
     
  13. GPM

    GPM Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,510
    Likes Received:
    506
    If that rule takes away the right to be heard and recorded, it is ultra vires of the Const, which gives right to justice as fundamental right. Justice is possible only if a litigant is given the freedom to argue his own case, as in criminal or civil suits.

    Anyone arguing his own case too has to be given that status. You cannot put forth your arguements standing at the back of the spectators, you have to come near to the bar of the court.

    It is so, of course. SC went beyond its brief, and unfortunately it frequently does so.
     
  14. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    @GPM since you are not aware how court works that is why you said the above.

    He can argue his case no doubt about it. What the court has said how you sit in chairs meant for the officers of court for argument he has to come to where he or his lawyer is suppose to stand.

    PIL case are different where person files it in the greater interest of pubic. In the present case of ltalians marine where the matter was sub judice and court already issued notice in such case person who is not party to the proceedings filed PIL. If you rememberi it was AG who informed the Court and hon'ble Court issued notice on it.
    Now if you want to take personal credit out of bringing back marines just by filing PIL for contempt and then twit about it, then you are asking for trouble.

    Sawmi is most of the time seen in courts that is why such beating was given to him. If marines have come and court has accepted their return in time, he ought to have withdrawn his PIL. That is why court has said who are you, meaning what is your status here to move PIL, how you are effected in this already complicated matter.
    Who so ever reported this story has not done in proper manner. Who are you means what is your status to move application, when court said any person from street comes and arguemeans that any person in dispute between two parties cannot file application before satisfying their status as party and how they are aggrived party.

    It would be better if some other news report from other source of court hearing is posted and discussed here.
    I appriciate your concern and this is how alert citizen should be. SC has jeliously guarded the fundamental rights of citizen from state actions and we are very fortunate to have supreme court protecting our rights. Very good example is the recent patent jugment in cancer drug case. There by allowing affordable drugs to public at large in future.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    nrj, Singh, Patriot and 1 other person like this.
  15. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    I don't think you understand the meaning of the term ultra vires. It means beyond the powers. Your comment "it is ultra vires of the Const" means "it is beyond the powers of the Constitution."

    In courts, you can argue your case, but not for others: SC

    Swamy was not arguing his own case. Whatever he was attempting to do, was ultra vires of Swamy (now you learnt the correct usage of that term).

    Quoted from the link above:
    The SC was well within its brief. It was Swamy who got all puffed up trying to act like he was representing the people, or to put in his own rhetoric, "Bharat Mata."
     
    nrj and Singh like this.
  16. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    I wonder if this was another case of "Kissa Kursi ka!
     
  17. dhananjay1

    dhananjay1 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    972
    Likes Received:
    912
    Location:
    india
    If people like Katju are any indication, the SC judges are not a very bright lot.
     

Share This Page