Kerala High Court advocates scuffle with journalists. File photoThe ruckus created by advocates in Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram was different from earlier outbursts in Delhi, Chennai and Hyderabad. The judiciary and executive were quick to react to the issue by offering to mediate.
Even before Kerala High Court Acting chief justice Thottathil Radhakrishnan reacted to the issue, the Chief Justice of India got involved after the Delhi unit of the Kerala Union of Working Journalists brought the issue to his notice. He asked advocates and journalists to keep their cool and directed his colleague, justice Kurian Joseph, to work with justice Radhakrishnan to settle the issue.
The next day, justices P.N. Ravindran and P.R. Ramachandra Menon went to Thiruvananthapuram on a fact-finding mission about the violence on the Vanchiyur court premises. They recommended the formation of a media relations committee that included journalists, advocates and clerks to preempt any more skirmishes and ensure the smooth functioning of the courts. A permanent mechanism has been envisaged.
Meanwhile, advocate general C.P. Sudhakara Prasad called for a judicial inquiry into the violence on the court premises and organized a meeting to mobilize support for the demand. When chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan visited Kochi later to mediate in the issue, he said the decision for a judicial inquiry will stand and any problems in future will be solved by a permanent body chaired by the Advocate General.
Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan addresses media after a meeting with advocates and representatives of journalists. File photoHe, however, evaded a question about the journalists' apprehensions about more retaliations. He said no one should go to the court to beat up someone or to get beaten up.
The chief minister said the government could not interfere in matters that occurred within the High Court. Then what was the point of his compromise talk in Kochi? The permanent body that he helped create includes the advocate general, Bar Council representative, three representatives each of the bar association and the journalists' union. This mechanism is heavily tilted towards the advocates. Since the chairman is a political appointee, the body is sure to reflect political considerations too.
To lock the media room used by reporters covering the court proceedings was akin to blocking the media. The bar association has come under a cloud of suspicion by trying to intimidate their colleagues who had criticized this move.
The attempts by the state government and the judiciary to take steps to prevent any such incidents are welcome indeed. But that should not give an opportunity for the problem-makers to go unpunished.
The mediators should come clean by removing any apprehensions that they are treating the attackers and the victims alike. They could try to bring in some more credibility to their intentions by proving that they were able to take actions against miscreants. The government should tell us how the police investigation was progressing.
When JNU students' union president Kanhaiya Kumar was produced before the magistrate courts in Delhi, a group of BJP-affiliated advocates attacked the student leader as well as reporters and professors who had come to the court in solidarity with their student.
The Supreme Court appointed eminent lawyers as observers when Kumar was produced before the high court. Even those observers came under attack.
The Supreme Court said that it would take stringent action on the basis of the observers’ report. Even the advocates' association promised an inquiry and subsequent action.
Nothing has come out of these promises. Even the police have not acted effectively in this case so far. Looks like the Kerala events are set to go that way.
