Article Today, New Delhi:
A proposal by more than 100 Members of Parliament seeking the impeachment of Madras High Court judge Justice G.R. Swaminathan has triggered strong opposition across the legal fraternity. Former judges of the Supreme Court and several High Courts have criticised the move, describing it as an attack on the independence of the judiciary rather than a constitutionally justified action.
Open Letter by Former Judges
More than 50 former judges, including ex-Chief Justices of High Courts and former Supreme Court judges, issued an open letter condemning the impeachment proposal. They argued that the grounds cited by the MPs do not meet the high constitutional threshold required for removing a sitting judge. According to them, impeachment is an extraordinary remedy and cannot be invoked merely because a judicial decision proves controversial or politically inconvenient.
Concerns Over Judicial Intimidation
The former judges cautioned that targeting a judge over a specific verdict amounts to intimidation. They stressed that judicial independence depends on judges being free to decide cases without fear of political retaliation. Such actions, they warned, could weaken public confidence in democratic institutions and the rule of law.
Reference to Past Precedents
In their statement, the former judges recalled instances from the Emergency period when the judiciary faced political pressure. They referred to the supersession of senior judges after the Kesavananda Bharati case and the sidelining of Justice H.R. Khanna following the ADM Jabalpur verdict. They also noted that recent Chief Justices have faced persistent criticism, which they said reflects a growing trend of politicising judicial functioning.
The Tirupparankundram Order
The impeachment proposal follows Justice Swaminathan’s order related to the lighting of a Karthigai Deepam on the Tirupparankundram hill in Tamil Nadu. The judge directed that the lamp be lit by a specified time, while observing that the act would not infringe upon the rights of any community. He also noted that failure to allow the ritual could weaken established claims over the hill temple.
Law and Order Concerns
However, the Tamil Nadu government cited law and order considerations and did not implement the direction. The issue escalated after tensions arose between religious groups and the police in the area, turning a local dispute into a wider political controversy.
Debate Over Constitutional Limits
Legal experts argue that disagreement with a judicial order should be addressed through appeals and legal remedies, not through impeachment. They maintain that using constitutional mechanisms for political ends risks eroding the separation of powers.
Implications for Democracy
The growing opposition to the impeachment proposal highlights broader concerns about safeguarding judicial autonomy. Observers note that how Parliament proceeds will have significant implications for the balance between democratic accountability and judicial independence in India’s constitutional framework.
