Community bias!!
The label of our community is the ticket of social acceptance . The most learned of us, do not give up our tale telling names . In the centre of many a metro, we talk of our ‘social connectivity’ in the context of our birth signs. We place ourselves in the context of our birth- the first biological accident life is victim to. We proceed to brick our structure on considerations of caste and class. We play the card brazenly, shamelessly and often to our immediate advantage.
Our pretensions of social catholicity are driven by a cockeyed vision. For instance when we choose a person belonging to the under privileged section to a high public office, we first choose the community, then the person and then go about claiming the egalitarian nature of our social order. Rarely do men of great talent make it on their own and then throw the shadow of their great achievement on the community they belong to.
I am saying this in the context of a recent development in the state High Court. A advocate questioned the ongoing process of selection of four persons to the constitutional office of High court judges. I am not party to the content of his affidavit, since the writ petition is yet to be admitted. The counsel stood up opposing the constitution of the bench that was hearing the matter. He pointed out that one of the judges had the ‘proximity’ disadvantage of hearing the lis. In short he said : I do not believe that you will be unbiased in the course of deciding the constitutional issues raised herein. The judge recused form hearing the matter. The other judge did not qualify to any aspect of ‘proximity’ and wondered if he too gained the lack of confidence of the lawyer petitioner and oh behold! he answered in the affirmative.
Vasireddy Prabhunath the lawyer voicing concerns of the institution stopped short of dubbing the judge as incompetent to deal with a matter that deals with a person of his own community!! If any proof of the unsaid allegation was needed it came screaming in the packed court when the lawyer “with out fear or favour” snapped at the Advocate General and said he too was ‘part of the group” It is known that the few things the judge and the Advocate General share are their height, love for language, Shakespeare and their community. Surely since height love for the Bard are not the questionable disqualifications it is not difficult to conclude the alleged disqualification.
In the corridors of the hallowed High Court , we all talk of communities. Tragic, that at the sanctum sanatorium of Articles 14, 15, and 16, the high priests and the vendors talk this language. Now it out in the open. To quote form a gem that fell in the midst of the embarrassment: “ We live in perilous times where on occasion passion dominates reason. “
WE THE PEOPLE gave to ourselves this great nation. We the people, in the historic voyage understood the disadvantages of a society divided on community and other similar denominators. We the people in the midst of a bloody birth inherited the sanity to ensure against such unhygienic denominators. Today as we head to the Shashtiabdipoorthi- the sixtieth birth day of the paramount parchment we return to the roots. “Let it be in the open” a wise man said. A complicated adult world that sanctions adultery still holds back its approval for the act at a public place. We in a way have liberalised this sensitivity.
Time to think. It is easy to blame my colleague Prabhunath. That will be the task begun. The other aspect is the more challenging one!!.
LRC.
The label of our community is the ticket of social acceptance . The most learned of us, do not give up our tale telling names . In the centre of many a metro, we talk of our ‘social connectivity’ in the context of our birth signs. We place ourselves in the context of our birth- the first biological accident life is victim to. We proceed to brick our structure on considerations of caste and class. We play the card brazenly, shamelessly and often to our immediate advantage.
Our pretensions of social catholicity are driven by a cockeyed vision. For instance when we choose a person belonging to the under privileged section to a high public office, we first choose the community, then the person and then go about claiming the egalitarian nature of our social order. Rarely do men of great talent make it on their own and then throw the shadow of their great achievement on the community they belong to.
I am saying this in the context of a recent development in the state High Court. A advocate questioned the ongoing process of selection of four persons to the constitutional office of High court judges. I am not party to the content of his affidavit, since the writ petition is yet to be admitted. The counsel stood up opposing the constitution of the bench that was hearing the matter. He pointed out that one of the judges had the ‘proximity’ disadvantage of hearing the lis. In short he said : I do not believe that you will be unbiased in the course of deciding the constitutional issues raised herein. The judge recused form hearing the matter. The other judge did not qualify to any aspect of ‘proximity’ and wondered if he too gained the lack of confidence of the lawyer petitioner and oh behold! he answered in the affirmative.
Vasireddy Prabhunath the lawyer voicing concerns of the institution stopped short of dubbing the judge as incompetent to deal with a matter that deals with a person of his own community!! If any proof of the unsaid allegation was needed it came screaming in the packed court when the lawyer “with out fear or favour” snapped at the Advocate General and said he too was ‘part of the group” It is known that the few things the judge and the Advocate General share are their height, love for language, Shakespeare and their community. Surely since height love for the Bard are not the questionable disqualifications it is not difficult to conclude the alleged disqualification.
In the corridors of the hallowed High Court , we all talk of communities. Tragic, that at the sanctum sanatorium of Articles 14, 15, and 16, the high priests and the vendors talk this language. Now it out in the open. To quote form a gem that fell in the midst of the embarrassment: “ We live in perilous times where on occasion passion dominates reason. “
WE THE PEOPLE gave to ourselves this great nation. We the people, in the historic voyage understood the disadvantages of a society divided on community and other similar denominators. We the people in the midst of a bloody birth inherited the sanity to ensure against such unhygienic denominators. Today as we head to the Shashtiabdipoorthi- the sixtieth birth day of the paramount parchment we return to the roots. “Let it be in the open” a wise man said. A complicated adult world that sanctions adultery still holds back its approval for the act at a public place. We in a way have liberalised this sensitivity.
Time to think. It is easy to blame my colleague Prabhunath. That will be the task begun. The other aspect is the more challenging one!!.
LRC.
No comments:
Post a Comment