Communists lock horns with judiciary in Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram, Apr 15: It is the Communist Party of India (Marxist) versus the judiciary in Kerala. And the latest confrontation has risen with the Kerala High Court rejecting the ''unconditional apology'' of Local Administration Minister Paloli Mohamemdkutty and deciding to advance contempt proceedings against him.

The CPI(M), which had been critical of many of the recent judgements after it assumed power in the state, had lashed out at the judiciary asking it to stop ''interfering'' in the affairs of the Executive and Legislature. On the Paloli episode, the CPM said it was unjust on the part of the judiciary to humiliate a minister representing the executive, despite his unconditional apology.

''The Judiciary, Executive and Legislature have to work independently and one cannot interfere in the affairs of the other,'' CPI(M) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan said and added that the party was committed to maintaining to the credibility of the judiciary.

The Kerala High Court on Friday rejected the ''unconditional apology'' tendered by Mr Mohammedkutty for his alleged remarks against the judiciary during his public speech in January. The court pursued contempt case against the Minister.

The Court said Mr Mohammedkutty's controversial remark that ''weight of the currency bundles influenced court rulings'', would have a great impact on the minds of the general public compared to that of a speech made by a poor, illiterate and ignorant common man.

Meanwhile Mr Mohammedkutty said that he was ready to face the court adding '' I am not afraid of punishment.'' Rejecting the Opposition's demand for his resignation, he said every citizen had a right to point out the ''weaknesses of the judiciary.'' He had also refused to offer an public apology as suggested by the court. The court had observed that the damage done to the image of the judicial system could be mitigated to some extent if an unconditional apology was tendered by the minister.

The CPI(M) had also rejected the demand for his resignation and the suggestion of public apology and had decided to wage a legal battle.

Mr Mohammedkutty is the second minister in the Left Democratic Front(LDF) Ministry, who had been held up in a wrangle with the judiciary. Last month when the state assembly session was on, a Local Court in Palakkad had issued an arrest warrant against Electricity Minister A K Balan in a ''rail roko'' agitation case. The CPI(M) had strongly protested against the arrest warrant and what angered the party most was that the arrest warrant was issued while the Assembly was in session.

The CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front had passed a resolution in the Assembly expressing the House's reservations over the arrest warrant. The resolution even led to uproarious scenes in the assembly and some members of the ruling front and the Opposition almost came to blows.

The CPI(M) had been engaged in a conflict with the judiciary soon after it resumed power in the state. The first blow to the CPI(M) led government was the scrapping of some of the sections of the Kerala Professional Colleges Act 2006, which the LDF considered to be a milestone in Professional education.

The Students Federation of India (SFI), the pro-CPI(M) students wing, had staged demonstrations against justice V K Bali, former Chief Justice of Kerala High Court, in whose bench the case of the professional colleges was heard.

The SFI came out with allegations that Justice Bali had stayed at the guest house of a private college when petitions challenging the law were pending in his court. The angry supporters of the CPI(M), Democratic Youth Federation of India and the SFI had even enacted mock send-offs to Justice Bali when he retired.

It was not too long after this that the High Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation(CBI) to investigate the controversial SNC Lavalin case, involving CPI (M) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, which had embarrassed the left party.

Another judgment that earned the CPI(M)'s displeasure was the lifting of a ban on soft drinks like Coca-Cola and Pepsi that the Left Government had imposed. It should also be noted that it was in 1997 that the Communists first protested against the judiciary when the High Court held that 'bandh' was illegal. The party had challenged the decision, but the Supreme Court upheld it.

Even the national leadership of the CPI(M) had joined its state unit in the tug of war with the judiciary. CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat, who was here in connection with the 50th anniversary of the first Communist Government in the state, asked the courts to refrain from encroaching upon the spheres of the legislature and executive.

At the public meeting in connection with the golden jubilee, he said the democratic will of the people for social justice should not be undermined while referring to the recent Supreme Court orders on issues relating to the OBC quota and self-financing colleges.

''Several legislations that accelerated the social reforms in India, like the Land Reforms Bill and Education Bill passed by the 1957 EMS Namboodiripad ministry, were included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution. Now, the Supreme Court says the Ninth Schedule is open to judicial review. Today, the judiciary is challenging the content of both the Bills,'' Mr Karat said.

The Left were not alone in raising concerns on the role of the judiciary. Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had cautioned the judiciary from spilling over into the territory of the legislature, as it would become a case of ''overreach'', at a conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of High Courts in New Delhi recently.

The Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party state units had criticised the CPI(M) of indulging in a tug of war with the judiciary.

Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) president Ramesh Chennithala described as ''unfortunate'' the CPI(M)'s statements against the courts and asked it to make it clear whether it was going ahead for a direct confrontation with the judiciary.

BJP State President P K Krishnadas said the CPI(M) had now raised its voice against the judiciary to divert attention from the non-performance of its government.

UNI