Opinion

Chandrachud: A temporary hero

The changing attitudes of Left-liberals towards Supreme Court judge D.Y. Chandrachud is a testimony to their commitment to their inglorious cause

Ravi Shanker Kapoor

October 3, 2018

In the last week of September, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was hailed by the ‘intellectuals’ as the judge of the century for his lucidly written dissenting judgments

If war is the continuation of politics by other means, as the legendary Prussian general Clausewitz wrote, Left-liberals’ activism is jihad against democracy and liberty by other means. In this jihad, the truth is the first casualty and tyranny the ultimate beneficiary. Their changing attitudes towards Supreme Court judge D.Y. Chandrachud is a testimony to their commitment to their inglorious cause.

Justice D.Y. Chandrachud had said that he would better want to be known as a “nationalist judge” rather than an “Aadhaar judge”.

In a perceptive write-up in The Times Of India (October 1), Dhananjay Mahapatra wrote, “In the last week of September, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was hailed by the ‘intellectuals’ as the judge of the century for his lucidly written dissenting judgments—first in quashing Aadhaar by terming it as an instrument to turn India into a surveillance state; second, in ordering setting up of a Supreme Court-monitored SIT to probe the case related to arrest of five rights activists.”

Mahapatra contrasted such lionization with the insinuations that the apex court judge had to face just a few months earlier. “A hue and cry were raised more than three years after the alleged suspicious death of judicial officer B.H. Loya, who was the trial judge in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case… The very same lawyers, who are now hailing Justice Chandrachud’s dissent in Aadhaar and arrest of activists, were passionately seeking a SIT probe headed by a retired SC judge into Loya’s death till March 16, when a Bench of CJI Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and Chandrachud reserved order on the petitions.” When Chandrachud wrote the unanimous judgment for the Bench on April 19, he along with his brother judges became the target of calumny of the entire Left-liberal establishment.

From their perspective, Chandrachud was not behaving himself even before that—in the Aadhaar case. As in an observant piece, Utkarsh Anand of CNN-News18 wrote on February 1, 2018, Chandrachud had bristled at the innuendoes thrown at him. He had said that he would better want to be known as a “nationalist judge” rather than an “Aadhaar judge.” “If that is the impression, so be it… I would be better like to be known as a nationalist judge.”

It must be noted that few things in the lexicon of intellectuals are more derogatory than ‘nationalist.’ Even the murderous Maoists or Naxals are tolerated as champions of the poor, albeit misguided, but nationalists belong to the darkest quarters of perdition.

For Left-liberals, however, war is a way of life, their way of life; they are continuously warring to impose their views, ideas, ideals, etc., imposed on the polity, society, economy, culture.

Chandrachud’s sin was that he had dared to question the anti-Aadhaar petitioners, which is practically the entire intellectual class. Now since the intellectuals regard themselves as the arbiters and custodians of the truth, they can scarcely tolerate any challenge to their point of view—which, needless to say, is the true point of view. Their lawyer, senior counsel Shyam Divan, used the term “Aadhaar judges.” Taking on Divan, Chandrachud, pointed out, “The moment we ask questions, we are attacked as if we are committed to an ideology or anyone. If that is so, I plead guilty to the charge. We are not here defending the government, nor are we going to follow any NGO line.” He went on to ask Divan, “What is this way of saying that either you are with me or you will be branded as Aadhaar judge?”

Chandrachud got it right. The message that intellectuals send across is clear: you are either with us or against us. Not just on Aadhaar but on everything under the sun, be it a matter related to the economy, politics, or foreign policy.

It needs to be emphasized here that either-with-us-or-against-us is war policy. From Biblical times and the Roman era to Lenin and Mussolini and recently George Bush Jr. after 9/11, these views and sentiments have been expressed only during periods of war or major conflicts.

For Left-liberals, however, war is a way of life, their way of life; they are continuously warring to impose their views, ideas, ideals, etc., imposed on the polity, society, economy, culture. Those who agree with them are heroes, those who don’t are villains. But there is no permanence: those who are heroes can become villains, and those who are villains can become heroes. Chandrachud is one such hero.

Note:
1. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.