Playing game with HC directives

The deplorable fact is that the interregnum between one time extension and another always passed off without any concrete advance being made in complying with the directives. For example, the last prayer for extension of the deadline was for six months which was granted; but when confronted with the question at the court as to what the government did in all that time to take matters forward, the government side could not come up with any satisfactory answer. The law minister has never tired of talking about the need for amendment to the CrPC to make the transition to judicial separation. But why no initiatives have been taken to bring the change about? The government has also constituted a seven-member judicial service commission to separate the lower judiciary from the executive and bring it under the control of the SC, but only two of its members are from the judiciary. Its composition is overwhelmingly executive in nature.

So the conclusion that one is constrained to draw is that the very intent of the government is open to question.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

The moot point is that the HC directives were not questioned by the government. On the contrary, by seeking all the time extensions it has, in effect, accepted the court's directives and the responsibility to comply with them. Why the consistently negative and diffident approach to the issue then? It lays bare the moral bankruptcy of the government and its credibility is severely compromised.

What was the necessity of this type of game play when separation of the judiciary was an election pledge of the government? And why the continual reiteration of the pledge without delivering on it in real terms? The government cannot evade these questions.

What the SC has ruled echoes the demand and sentiments of the nation as a whole. The government must fully abide by the HC directives and facilitate judicial independence before the next general election.