Donald Trump is lucky to have been born an American!

But Americans are not lucky!

You have heard all the slurs/taunts Donald Trump has thrown at the federal judge who has had the gumption to throw open all the thus-far confidential documents relating to the class action suit against Trump University, which Trump conceived as his money spinning education baby. It does not matter the baby is a still-born and has no credit to its account.

The judge is smart, in any case smarter than Trump. His justification for opening up Trump’s boxes of Pandora is that by being the nominee of the Republican Party for the high post of President of the US, he cannot hide behind mere formalities of protection of privacy of an ordinary citizen. He has to be an open book, at least those books not covering his tax returns.

Just imagine what would have happened in India. Trump would have been slapped by the judge and all his cousins, and brought serious charges of libel and possibly, taken to the extreme, even of sedition.

Oh, Trump just went on and on because he knew that the freedom of speech in the US is nearly inviolate. No such protection in India. The putative charges against Trump in India – brought down the dignity of the judiciary, not to mention contempt of court. Ouch, that must hurt all those high and mighty justices.

Trump went down on his knees to thank his Lord for not making him an Indian (not injun), as in India, the Lords (both the mythical and on the bench) are unforgiving.

Raghuram

Freedom of Speech and Supreme Court Justices

Justice A R Dave of the Supreme Court of India is reported to have made some statements [1] that raised a few questions in my mind. The most important one of them all is this: are there any fetters on the freedom of speech of the justices of Supreme Court of India when they are holding office.

The learned justice A R Dave is reported to have said the following:

“Had I been the dictator of India I would have introduced Gita and Mahabharata in Class I.”

Admitting that he has painted an impossible scenario – he being the dictator of India – this message has no chance of gaining any credibility, do we ignore this rant, though made at a seemingly responsible conclave? Can we really dismiss this as a personal viewpoint and can we assert that it will not have not any effect on his judicial philosophy? Going one step further, can we be convinced that his stated opinions are irrelevant to his outlook on secularism, abiding by the Indian Constitution?

I have my doubts. It is this deep seated doubt that has made me question the limits of freedom of speech of the justices of Supreme Court of India.

Raghuram Ekambaram

References

1.    http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/indians-should-revert-to-ancient-traditions/article6275878.ece