Arun Shourie is a former cabinet minister, journalist, author, activist and an important voice in the public sphere. His 27th book, Anita Gets Bail, is an account of and commentary on the state of the Indian judiciary. In an interview with Newslaundry, Shourie speaks to Madhu Trehan about the issues the legal system is grappling with today.

Commending the efforts of Niranjan Takle, the Caravan journalist who wrote about the possible tampering with evidence in the probe into Justice Loya’s murder case, Shourie expresses distress over the case.

On the transfer of the judge appointed to hear the Sohrabuddin Sheikh murder case and absenteeism of main accused Amit Shah, BJP president, from the hearing despite being summoned, he remarks: “The Supreme Court does nothing! It is their own order being violated, but (the Supreme Court remains) asleep, not asleep but looking the other way.”

He further mentions points about the legal proceedings in the Loya case. “After the story is published by Caravan, the Bombay advocates’ association immediately files a petition in the high court saying there should be an independent inquiry into the circumstances of the death,” he says, adding: “And suddenly, two unknown petitioners turn up in the Supreme Court and suddenly the Supreme Court says, ‘Noo… no… no…, we’ll hear it. Nobody else will hear the case’.”

Madhu asks Shourie whether the departure of Smriti Irani from the I&B ministry, and the new minister’s comment that he won’t control the media, is a positive sign. He replies with a wonderful couplet: “Qaidi ka mann behlane ko, darbaan badalte jaate hain.” (To keep the prisoner engaged, gatekeepers are often changed.)

On the speculation of possible mistakes that led to Irani’s departure, he says, “After all, Smriti Irani could not be issuing those instructions (and) circulars without clearance (from the PMO).”

On the contempt law that deems the judiciary as “unquestionable”, Shourie comments: “The formal position is that as long as we do not cast aspersions on the motives of the judges, it is not contempt of court.”

He adds: “Secondly, there’s been a great advance under Atalji’s (Atal Bihari Vajpayee) government that truth must be regarded as a defence and that is now the law. So we should be able to prove the truth in these matters.”

Thirdly, he says, indicating how long it may last: “Thus far, the court has said you are welcome to analyse our judgments.” He adds: “And we should use that frequently. I think it will be enough if we only analyse their judgments in detail, it will be enough to alert them that they’re being watched.”

On the National Police Commission, Shourie observes that the court is complicit in helping politicians convert the police into private guards. He adds: “They’re inter-locking webs of mutual complicity. They are not different (judiciary and politicians.)”

He observes the number of times they’ve had to modify judgments, such as on the liquor sale ban and national anthem. He says: “You’re being theatrical… ek bohot bada pose mar diya (putting up a big show) and after that you have to keep adjusting yourself to the reality, to the consequences of what you’ve laid down.”

Commenting on the number of RTI activists who died in their efforts to expose the truth, he says: “In the press index we are so far down. And I think we’re lower than Afghanistan… As citizens, we should wake up to the condition to which India has been reduced in these matters.”

Madhu argues that citizens who are entangled in petty hardships, such as getting their inflated electricity bill corrected, hardly have time for activism. To that, Shourie says: “Yes, none of us has the time but given our circumstances, the only way to get out of this quicksand is to find the time to do something.”

The duo also discuss the Ayodhya land dispute, with Shourie enumerating the conspiracy theories regarding the judgment yet to be delivered. He says, “The fact that such conspiracy theories should be so prevalent shows our lack of faith in the judiciary and in things being done on facts.”

Madhu asks Shourie: “What would you do if you were in the government today?” He replies: “I’d resign.”