Lawfully Yours: By Retired Justice K Chandru | Can't fix norms to CJI's work style, but there can't be ethical exceptionalism either

CHENNAI: Human rights activists have accused former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud of skipping the hearing of some of the crucial cases under the disposal of the Supreme Court and diluting the ethos of the top court with some of his actions such as celebrating the Ganesh festival with PM Modi or bringing in god into the realm of writing judgments. What is your reaction to such an evaluation of his tenure and contributions? Are there any specific norms or rules that control the CJI's functioning?

-- J Ramanathan, Chennai

The problem with the earlier CJI is that he spoke lofty ideals eloquently on academic campuses all over the world but, back in this country, sitting in the highest court, didn't translate them into action much. Between his revolutionary words and reactionary opinions delivered as judgments, there was a huge gap. It belied our hopes bet on a Harvard-educated law scholar. Even as a master of the roster, he didn't share all the constitution bench matters and reserved most of them to himself. He spoke about diversity in judges' appointments and gender justice but did not recommend a single woman to the SC bench. There can be no norms fixed for their work style, but being the head of one of the most powerful judiciary in the world, there can't be ethical exceptionalism either.

--

Lawmakers should need to understand the legislative intent of the document

As a citizen, can I claim it as my right that laws are simple to the understanding of laypeople instead of having tough, complex technical terms? I see similar problems when signing legal documents, especially with private banks of late. Hidden clauses are inserted in such a manner that a normal person availing a loan will find it tough to understand and take a call. If governments while enacting laws ensure they are easy to understand by the citizens, private parties and others will also be forced to practice better transparency in legal documents.

-- Vairavan, Chennai

There is a British saying about lawmakers: "I am the country’s parliamentary draftsman. I compose the country's laws, And of half the litigation I'm undoubtedly the cause".

We have yet to learn the art of drafting an easily understandable law. With double negatives and Victorian vintage, many times it's difficult for even lawyers to understand. When drafting conveyance deeds for selling or buying a property, the drafters use bombastic language which runs into several pages. For a sale deed, what is required is a five-para document but we end up drafting 50 pages. The banks and insurance companies are much worse. By writing in minute passages they completely immunise themselves. Fortunately, courts have assumed powers to strike down one-sided clauses in those printed forms.