Friday, January 21, 2011

kapil sibal

since the supreme court is monitoring the probe, it seems to want a complete suspension of discourse in the public space. it has asked the minister to act responsibly. the court must ask itself whether it is acting responsibly by issuing loud and brash observations, which suggest a halo of irresponsible intemperateness.

the dignity of the supreme court would have been established if it had simply asked the ruling party as well as the opposition to keep their public discourse on the issue to a low pitch. 

a responsible, responsive and dignified government receives in return the contempt of the media, the opposition and now the court. all of these three institutions are not performing their responsibilities with care and sobriety. instead, these seem to be nourishing and sustaining each other and are enjoying the spotlight. for the supreme court to ask a minister to behave responsibly is possible, but who will ask the supreme court to behave responsibly. the citizen possibly has that right, and as a citizen, we can raise the issue to the supreme court, that it cannot act in a manner that wades into the political goings-on. if it wants the minister to not express his opinion, it should request so in  a decent manner, that would befit its stature and position.

instead, we have a petitioner, subramanian swamy, telling the media that the minister must correct himself or get out. why is the petitioner so keen on the public not receiving the opinion of the minister. if all he wants is for a proper investigation into the matter, he would and must have welcomed the opinion of the minister, as only contributing to the discussion. but, since, he is a political person performing a political act, a thoroughly partisan act, which he reveals when he asks the minister to get out. such are the characters that are pretending to acting in wholesome good.

No comments: