He is relevant because: (i) he is a former CJI, (ii) he is physically and mentally sound enough to still participate in public debate notwithstanding his retirement, (iii) in the quasi-feudal society of India that is Bharat, the likes of him will always be influential gatekeepers of public discourse.

There is legitimate criticism that can be made about this interview and how it was conducted. This, however, is not it. Very immature behaviour - commenting anonymously like this using ad hominem instead of arguments. Let me see you actually say all this to that guy's face? I bet you'd never dare.

I think the interviewer used very tried and tested interview techniques on a person on whom those wouldn't work. Among other things, he should surely know that Chandrachud could push back with arguments about conventions and processes. Take the commenting on judgments thing: if he had asked a judge in his own country (the UK) about it, there are similar understandings around not commenting too much on judgments there as well. As somebody who has some acquaintance with the UK legal system, I will say Chandrachud was good in that he didn't use the what-aboutary pushback ('what about in the UK?') too often. This interview largely seemed like he drew from a manual of techniques and just threw up whatever he knew to apply well. As somebody who heartily supports good journalism (especially the kind that questions the Modi government), this kind of an effort is both disappointing and unhelpful.

Heres one thing Chandrachud can do to positively affect his own legacy. Since he seems obsessed with it anyway. Retire. Quit. Dont take a job that any government offers you. Tell people that doing so would have been inappropriate and that post-retirement positions are used as carrots and sticks to influence the judiciary. Make it morally unacceptable for SC judges to accept post retirement positions.

Work in a law school somewhere teaching the law- GLC or MNLU or NLUD or CLC or something. Dont go to rajya sabha, dont try for president. All those things might put your name in some trivia books, but real legacy- the sort of legacy that H.R. Khanna, K Chandru, Santosh Hegde, Chelmeshwar -all of those people have- will take standing up for something real just a little bit just once.

He will have a tarnished legacy anyway- and he knows it. He didnt step up on babri or kashmir or heck even demonetisation, he didnt step up for gay marriage. He wrote toxic gender ideology into the law that will take decades of undoing so women and children can be safeguarded. He read things into the constitution that werent there at all. But he can at least be known as the judge who stood up to judicial corruption.

Come on! Do one thing right! He doesnt even need another job, he doesnt need to do what judges usually do- its entirely an unforced choice that hes making by following the usual route. If he just retires , lives a smaller life from here on , but makes it morally clear that SC judges shouldnt accept post retirement positions- he would have some sort of legacy that future historians would admire.

His father was only ever known for being a careerist coward who let indira gandhi make a joke out of the constitution. A career of being a great legal mind thrown into the dust because of cowardice and greed. He can at least save the family name somewhat instead of continuing to curse his children with that reputation.

I'm not even left-wing. Show me this abuse you speak of. I dont care about partisan allegations of misdeeds of judges, I dont care who does it more I just want it to stop- If left wing judges have done it it was wrong and its not a licence for the other party to sell out the country more, if theyre so opposed to corruption they should litigate corruption cases more instead of destroying the offices of the Lokayukta across states.

This issue isnt partisan. Both the left and the right should want a supreme court that is not beholden to the government of the day. One day the BJP might lose elections again- would you be happy then if judges engaged in similar corruption by passing pro-congress decisions hoping to get post retirement jobs? This issue is only about preserving the constitution and the independence of the judiciary and I dont know who in their right mind could oppose it. Why do you like corruption?