Senior counsel and Supreme Court judge candidate Gopal Subramanium has sent a letter to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) withdrawing his candidature, according to CNN IBN, writing:
I am fully conscious that my independence as a lawyer is causing apprehensions that I will not toe the government line. This factor has been decisive in refusing to appoint me.
It is sad day as the judiciary has been compromised. All charges against me are false.
A member of the collegium had anonymously supported Subramanium in an Economic Times newspaper report today, while the government had claimed that Subramanium was tainted because of a telephone conversation with lobbyist Niira Radia and his alleged conduct in working on the 2G scam as a lawyer, which Subramanium had denied at the time in a letter.
Update: Full 9-page resignation letter (via Bar & Bench) below.
The former solicitor general claimed that his file had been “segregated” by the government from the file with the other three names recommended for Supreme Court judgeship at the same time, resulting in the amended file never having been returned to the collegium for reconsideration. “I have now reliably learnt that no file was sent seeking reconsideration and that such segregation and appointments have been made outside your knowledge and also without the active consent of the Collegium. If my understanding is correct, then the aforesaid three appointments appear to be against the framework prescribed by the Constitution and by the Supreme Court in various pronouncements.”
He said he would withdraw because if he did not, the other three’s appointments – senior advocate Rohinton Nariman, and chief justices Adarsh Goel and Arun Mishra – who “have been my friends over so many years” would “come under a cloud”. “The least I owe them is that I withdraw.”
“I am, however, unable to dispel the sense of unease that the Judiciary has failed to assert its independence by respecting likes and dislikes of the Executive.”
Subramanium wrote that “in accordance with the highest traditions, when such events occur, i.e., when a lawyer invited to the Bench does not get to become a judge”, he would not practise before the Supreme Court until after the current CJI would end his term, while also having to “undertake, necessarily, personal and spiritual processes to re-enter as a lawyer” after a self-imposed ban on legal work pending his consideration as a judge. This was “necessary, lest any feeling of anger, distress, or disappointment should suddenly invade the conscious mind while performing my duties as a lawyer”.
Full letter highlights, digested
Subramanium wrote at the start of his letter:
Over the past two weeks quite a few media reports have voiced the Union Government’s reservations about my appointment. These reports speak of alleged adverse reports against me by the Intelligence Bureau and the CBI. I must say that these media reports are malicious insinuations based on half-truths, and appear to be the result of carefully planted leaks aimed at generating doubts in the minds of the Collegium and of the public as to the suitability and propriety of appointing me as a judge of the Supreme Court.
I am fully conscious that my independence as a lawyer is causing apprehensions that I will not toe the line of the Government. This factor has been decisive in refusing to appoint me. I have no illusions that this is so. I find it strange that no newspaper even spoke of my work over 34 years. The very fact that the Executive Government has not acknowledged my work, is sufficiently indicative of the true nature of its intentions.
I must, therefore, take this opportunity to clarify the allegations made in these news reports. I may add that on 15th May 2014, the Intelligence Bureau had given me a clean chit.
The IB has sought my advice on sensitive matters of national security for over 25 years (including during the previous NDA regime). In fact the then Deputy Prime Minister, Shri L.K. Advani, used to treat me with so much courtesy. The CBI has also consulted me on numerous occasions (before, during, and after my tenure as Law Officer) and I continued to have been its lead lawyer even after my resignation from the post of Solicitor General. Among the various matters in which I have led the State and the CBI are the Parliament Attack case, the Bombay Blasts appeals, and in the matter of the confirmation of the death penalty to Ajmal Kasab. One wonders why the CBI would repeatedly engage me as lead counsel over the past 20 years if there was any doubt. I have reliably learnt that the Ministry of Law & Justice initiated an inquiry after 15th May 2014, with a clear mandate to find something to describe me as unsuitable.
Subramanium also rubbished allegations that he had convened a meeting between CBI officers and the lawyers for 2G scam accused A Raja, saying that such a meeting never took place. He also said that “this matter had been misrepresented and misreported by a certain English daily, the Court had chastised the reporter in question”.
He said that he had no contact with lobbyist Niira Radia during his tenure as law officer between 2005 and 2011, and had only consulted her before then about the abduction of one of her children.
In respect of the pool membership, which Radia allegedly offered to Subramanium, according to media reports citing the CBI report and the government, he said that he had actually asked additional advocate general Parag Tripathi for help with, due to his ill health and repairs ongoing at another pool.
His conduct and confrontation of the Gujarat government in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case, for which he happened to have been selected as amicus curiae by Supreme Court judges, was entirely merited by the facts, which opposing counsel had understood, and Subramanium bore no “personal vengeance or any kind of grudge against” Modi’s right-hand man Amit Shah who was a subject of the investigation.
Recounting that his and his wife’s only ever interaction with prime minister Narendra Modi had been cordial, during his stint as solicitor general (about which he parenthesised that his short-lived tenure in the post was “a period the memory of which I hope will be forgotten by me with time!!!”).
Citing or enclosing a number of character references of judges, such as those of former CJI SH Kapadia, Justices Krishna Iyer and Venkatachaliah and former law minister Veerappa Moily, he nevertheless said that he did not want his elevation to be the subject matter of politicisation or to be “placed in any position of embarrassment, having lived a life of professional dignity and honour”.
Gopal Subramanium's heartbreakingly candid letter to CJI
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
Law Ministers don't need to be brilliant lawyers ... for that matter they don't need to be lawyers at all. By your stupid logic should the Civil Aviation minister be an outstanding pilot ??? Should the Defence Minister be a gallant General ??? Should the Telecom Minister be a phone operator ???? Should the Finance Minister be an accountant ??? You say
We had a Harvard educated FM, a Cambridge educated PM and a Cambridge (school) educated Congress President and what did they do for the country??? Gift us a series of scams and reduce a constitutional post to a mockery. If that is what Harvard educated lawyers do I prefer a taxi driver to be in charge.
This is a democracy, R S Prasad is a representative of the people. So long as he is not a criminal / convicted there is nothing wrong with being a minister (or law minister)
PS - The present Lord chancellor of the UK (Law Minister) is a former TV presenter. You can read about him at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Grayling
See the comments in this link, not that anything can slow you down from quoting the Nira Radia-Tatan Tata convesrsation below! : www.legallyindia.com/201406234813/Bar-Bench-Litigation/gopal-s-sc-judgeship-recommendation-recalled-for-alleged-complicity-in-2g-scam#comments
Sanjay jain's elevation was stopped by the congress government because he was close to RSS.
GS stood against BJP leaders, they decided not to elevate him.
Whats the big fuss ? He may be intelligent. smart and god knows what not. Elevation has a bit of politics.
This is life. live with it. move on.
This is incorrectly copied from the letter. When using quotes, it would be good to reproduce than to change the language (which in this case, also changes the meaning).
I just noticed this one. However, there may be more
i remember his work in the staines commission, venkataswami commission, verma commission and also the pro bono matters he did. i cant think of one public service any other lawyer has done
to all lawyers- if you want to succeed forget idealism, pick the bjp and suck up to it. ur sure of succeeding.
GS is a successful lawyer but to call him a 'living legend' is taking a generous liberty with adjectives.
After reading his comments (as well as the foolish immature reporting and comments on LI), I think the Government made the right decision in not clearing him a judge of the Supreme Court. It is a pity that instead of being a mature and astute lawyer, Gopal Subramanium has exhibited his crass immaturity by being adamant and impatient; was he an amicus curiae for the Supreme Court or for Sonia's congress? Writing a ten page letter to CJI and appearing before a TV channel to defame Modi government (which is still the GOI whether we like it or not!)confirms that he was not a fit man for a judge of the highest court. His lack of humility reflects pomposity and self aggrandizement! The Government has every right to think carefully before clearing the appointment of someone who is likely to be partisan in his approach. Same goes for the decision to kick out the UPA governors.
Sorry but you seem to miss the point.
Good lawyer and good legal skills does NOT always impart character.
Character is shown (or known) by maturity, courtesy, behaviour, humility and acceptance of the rule of law.
If the Rule of law dictates that an IB clearance is necessary, than it is immaterial whether GS (or anyone else) likes it or not.
If your character is under assessment (for a valid reason, in this case for appointment of a SC judgeship) there is no reason to behave so immaturely and hold press conferences, write letters, make accusations, etc. He seems to have let gossip get the better of him. AFAIK the government has only mentioned that they have asked the CBI/IB to give a clean chit which would almost certainly have come about. By getting provoked by media reports and gossip GS has demonstrated his inclination to rash judgment; by pointing fingers at others in the letter he has done himself a discredit.
Finally, I don't recall GS sharing with the public his letter of acceptance to be considered for the SC position. Why then does he invite the world to see his letter of withdrawal. If he cannot afford the government of India a simple courtesy to withdraw in a dignified manner he is not fit to be a SC judge. Can you imagine Soli Sorabjee holding a press conference to denounce the government if he is dropped from some high appointment?
PS. Soli Sorabjee belonged to a different era. It would be puerile to guess what he would have done, under these very unfortunate circumstances..
Quoting Another View:
Quoting gyan:
however, the tone of this letter is utterly patronising and stinks of holier than thou attitude throughout. too sanctimonious and preachy and using the opportunity to pull down the executive of the day. clearly using the opportunity as a blunt tool of vendetta. I would not recommend his elevation, simply for the tone of this letter.
Firstly anyone who starts a letter by referring to himself as a "leading member of the bar" is being excessively narcissistic no matter how true it may be. It's just nauseating to read.
Some of it is very very patronising to the Prime Minister (page 6) and is written in a discernibly insulting manner which is subtle.
He questions the GOI's standing to assess his character when even the CJI, CVC, Lokpal and any officer of any senior capacity routinely undergos the same process before candidature to the highest posts in the land are made.
Then at page 6 he makes some weird point by stressing that he's seen the SC since he was 5 years old !!!! WTF is that about ?? So I've seen the SC since I was 3 (really, my parents lived at that time in Chanakyapuri) - so should I get an advantage to become an SC judge ??
The letter is signed off with a statement 'May God Bless you' to the CJI (Lodha) which is also sarcastic in the context.
GS would have been lauded if he quit the race in a dignified manner. Now he'll be another congress stooge who is crying over spilt milk and sour grapes. Shame!
as ram jet says there are two kinds of judges. those who know law and those who know the law minister. no guesses as to which one this govt prefers
I wish to take up this with any advocate of the Supreme case who is for liberty, fraternity, equality as enshrined in the Constitution which has stood the test of time.
1- the ib and cbi have raised certain allegations against him such as improper conduct as sg in 2010, improper. conduct with radia in 2010 and having certain personal oddities.
if these allegations are genuine why exactly has the ib and cbi engaged ga to argue such a large number of cases of public importance like 26/11 and bombay blasts after he resigned as sg in 2011. a simple manupatra search shows his appearance as cbi counsel in 34 final hearing matters in the sc in the past 3 years.
this shows that this report is totally trumped up
2- gs is a living legend. any young lawyer who has any experience of litigation would appreciate this. gs is a person who came up the hard way as a top lawyer. he had no family background, his father died when he was 11, and he grew up in what can only be called impoverished circumstances. unlike mukul who was the son of ab rohatgi, singhvi who was son of lm singhvi and salve who was son of nkp salve, gs came up the ladder on his own. more than his legal skill he is looked up to by young lawyers because of this
3- gs is not some middling lawywr with a medicore practice who was elevated. he is a person who has represented india at inyerntional forums, become a member of a foriegn chamber and has done a number of cases in public interest such as the js verma commission, staines commission
4- his language aside which i agree may seem a bit pompous, why should any person be subjected to clearly orchestrated leaks by the goverment of a cbi report. obv he should speak up.
5- also none of the above comments me tion the word sohrabuddin. why?
6- everybody should note one thing. over the years many seniors were asked to become sc judges. for example iqbal chagla and dipankar gupta. nobody agreed because of the financial sacrifice. u have a man here who gave up one incredibly lucrative practice to become a judge. a person who was designated a senior by the sc at the age of 37. if he is not qualified to bea direct appointee then i dont know who is.
lets not parrot the bjp line. we may not like gs. i myself at times found his accent to be unbearable. i still think modi will be way better than the congress. but what has happened here is quite shocking
Quoting Sense and Sensibility:
www.niticentral.com/2013/10/01/cbi-nia-colluding-with-politics-of-congress-140193.html
Very clear - poor GS should never have been amicus in sohrabuddin
Good One!
Quoting Gautam:
No corruption is not what is implied. What is being implied is the considerable difference in ideology and ideas between a man who was different and three men who were similiar
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first