Skip to main content

Meeting Justice Rohinton Nariman in a Sunday Morning


Aristotle once wrote in his Nicomachean Ethics that there are four significant virtues for human beings, namely Prudence, Temperance, Justice, and Courage. There are a few judges who have courage and sense of justice, both. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rohinton Nariman has been truly an exemplar judge and erudite historian, theologian and philologist, a great scholar of music as well as a courageous and meticulous jurist of our country. He did his Master of Laws from Harvard Law School in 1980-81 and taught by one of the finest jurists of the last century, Roberto Unger. He became Senior Advocate in 1993 in the age of 37 and also served as Solicitor General of India in 2011 before he was elevated as a judge of the Supreme Court of India in 2014. He delivered many landmark judgments, including Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. There are a few people with whom time moves too fast, but to count that experience takes ages. Justice Rohinton Nariman is one of those great jurists with whom a meeting appears an experience to cherish for the life-long.

Today, I along with my teacher Prof. Chanchal Kumar Singh have got the opportunity to meet him at his residence in Shimla where he comes every summer for a few weeks. The first lesson we have learnt that he is a hard task master in reading and research. He is consistent in reading and his passion for the books is visible in each word he speaks. After retiring from the Supreme Court of India Justice Nariman is working on various concepts in public law and theology. He has recently finished his work on religion and which may be published very soon in future. He has discussed with us various religious systems in the world and their common lessons such as compassion, suffering, and co-existence, etc. He admires Ashoka for his edict in which the focus was to learn other religions to enhance the meaning of one's own religion. Because, there are some common ethical postulates in all the religions and schools of religious systems. He also discussed the various philosophical schools in India such as Samkhya, Yoga, Purva Mimamsa, Buddhism, Jainism, Carvaka, and Ajivika. He reflected on the Taoism and its message of a natural way for the harmony and substantiated his argument with the example that how water is too soft but it cuts the mountain in a longer period of time to make its own way. 

Our discussion shifted in public law. We discussed the foundation of “basic structure doctrine” and its genesis in Indian Constitution. He differentiated basic structure doctrine from the doctrine of “implied limitation” and there is a reason to believe that basic structure is a constructed reality under Indian Constitution. He agrees with the first part of ratio of the majority judgment in Golaknath case that law under Art. 13(2) of the Constitution includes amendment under Art. 368 of the Constitution but disagrees with the second part of Ratio of the majority judgment which made distinction between power and procedure under Art. 368 of the Constitution. He mentions the four types of amendment procedures under Indian Constitution which prescribe changes but no one permits to repeal the basic features of the Constitution. He relies on the wording of Article 368 of the Constitution which talks about “change” instead of repealing the basic structure of the Constitution. He also refers the work of D. Conrad and believes that created power cannot subvert the source of power itself. In a question raised from the lectures of John Austin and writings of Carl Schmitt that if basic structure could be traced in the basic structure of society, Justice Nariman responded that the basic structure of Indian Constitution may be traced in the Constitution itself which has developed from the cherished ideals of Indian National Movement. In fact, in his opinion, Moti Lal Nehru in his 1928 report mentioned the principles of basic structure. Justice Nariman agrees that the doctrine of basic structure is significant for the Indian republican democracy to safeguard certain fundamental values enshrined under Indian Constitution. Justice Nariman has outlined the lacuna in interpretation in I.R. Coelho when the Court established a “double test” for reviewing law under the 9th Schedule of the Constitution. As per his opinion, any violation of a fundamental right may amount to the violation of the basic structure itself. There is no more fundamental than fundamental rights under Indian Constitution. There cannot be a hierarchy between fundamental rights. He is willing to work on the basic structure doctrine in future; his lectures on youtube on the basic structure doctrine exemplify his profound understanding on the subject. 

In a question raised by us about “Constitutional Morality”, he disagrees with the idea of developing another concept as a standard for judicial review which cannot be discerned concretely in the text of Indian Constitution. Though, he believes that the idea is not new and Justice Vivian Bose used to refer this concept in his judgments. Justice Nariman also suggested various reforms in the appointment and transfer of judges and believes that there should be a system of appointment in which the retired judges of the Supreme Court who have faith in the constitutional values must have a significant role to play along with the bar and the full strength of the Supreme Court judges. The body for the appointment of judges must have a fixed tenure of five years and judges must be appointed on the basis of maximum votes received by the nominees from the full strength of the Supreme Court judges. He has also suggested a constitution of the tribunal of the retired judge or judges of the Supreme Court in the matter related to Anti-Defection law instead of relying on the speaker who is always guided by political factionalism and convenience. 

We are also blessed to meet his wife Dr. Sanaya R. Nariman, a wonderful scholar who has authored many books on science. Her compassionate talk and graceful presence have made our Sunday morning really a wonderful experience. We are extremely lucky and blessed to get their affection and compassionate lessons about life and institutions in which we are living.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Physical Basis of Conscious Life: A Synthesis of William James's Physiological Psychology

I Introduction: Bridging Physiology and Psychology William James, in his landmark work The Principles of Psychology, provides a foundational framework connecting the brain's physiological mechanisms to the purposive, selective, and unified nature of conscious mental life. This blog analyzes James’s synthesis, which grounds psychological phenomena in the material workings of the nervous system without reducing consciousness to a mere epiphenomenon. We will explore his hierarchical model of the brain, which evolves from simple reflex actions in the lower nerve centers to the complex, deliberative functions of the cerebrum. Key themes include the role of the cerebrum as an organ of foresight and prudence, the physiological mechanism of habit as the process by which experience physically imprints itself upon the brain’s plastic matter, and consciousness's essential function as a “selecting agency” that is causally efficacious in steering the organism toward its own interests. Ultim...

Martin Heidegger's Deconstruction of the History of Ontology

I  Introduction In the opening pages of his magnum opus, Being and Time, Martin Heidegger resurrects a question he argues has been buried for millennia, framing his entire project with an epigraph from Plato’s Sophist: “For manifestly you have long been aware of what you mean when you use the expression ‘being’. We, however, who used to think we understood it, have now become perplexed.” This is no mere academic exercise but a deliberate reawakening of what Heidegger argues is the most fundamental and, paradoxically, the most forgotten question in the history of Western thought. For Heidegger, a pervasive “forgetfulness of Being” has characterized philosophy since antiquity, where the initial, vibrant inquiry into what it means “to be” solidified into a series of unexamined dogmas. The question was not answered and then set aside; rather, it fell into obscurity, concealed by the very traditions that were supposed to preserve it. This blog argues that Heidegger's critical "dest...

The Glory of Belief Industry

Disappearance of questions is the pre-condition of artificial certainty. Therefore, it is profitable investment to establish and sustain the belief industry. This industry produces the efficient Man whose substratum is not the divine soul or mental faculty but a non-thinking mind which militantly conform the group solidarity of the masses. When answers are easily available and generated by the Artificial Intelligence, who will take the pain for thinking and unthinking or deliberating to develop logical capacity or for establishing the paradigm of truth? As Ashis Nandy explains the creative process which requires to meditate with the questions and to remain with the questions for a longer period of time to create and unveil the mask of deception. The artistry in epistemic creativity necessitates the patience caring of the questions. The cultivation and exploration of questions and mitigated skepticism to unravel what is said and unsaid, the expressions and silences. Even so called Dark ...