- 14 hours ago
The Supreme Court on Thursday banned NCERT's latest political science textbook for Class VIII, describing one chapter as a calculated attempt to erode the credibility of the judiciary.
Category
ЁЯЧЮ
NewsTranscript
00:01The Supreme Court on Thursday banned the NCERT's latest political science textbook for Class 8,
00:07calling the contents of one chapter a calculated attempt to erode the credibility and prestige of the judiciary.
00:14A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joy Malabakchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi
00:21ordered the immediate removal of the chapter from all physical and digital platforms.
00:26It directed authorities to seize printed copies already in circulation.
00:31The court barred any teaching from the book.
00:34It imposed a blanket prohibition on its production and distribution
00:38and issued a show-cause notice to the centre and the NCERT chief seeking an explanation.
00:44When the hearing began, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court
00:48that the NCERT has already withdrawn the textbook and apologised.
00:52But the CGI observed that the statement issued by the NCERT did not contain any apology.
00:59At the heart of the controversy is a chapter that referred to corruption at various levels of the judiciary,
01:04warned that such corruption can weaken access to justice,
01:08stated that misconduct cases have dented public confidence,
01:12flagged massive case backlogs across courts,
01:15and noted that instances of corruption within the judiciary have surfaced in the past.
01:21After sharp observations from the Supreme Court,
01:24the Union Education Minister expressed regret.
01:50This isn't NCERT's first brush with the courts,
01:53but the response has rarely been this swift.
01:56In December 2021, petitioners challenged Class 12th History Chapter,
02:02which mentioned Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb funding temples.
02:06The Delhi High Court dismissed the case after petitioners withdrew their plea.
02:10The same year, NCERTs faced accusations of glorifying Mughal rulers.
02:15The Rajasthan Lower Court issued a notice but took no further action.
02:18The Supreme Court's sweeping ban has ignited a larger constitutional debate.
02:22One group argues that this is an attempt to discredit and weaken a key constitutional institution.
02:29Critics question whether the court has shown equal urgency
02:32in responding to earlier controversies involving textbooks' revisions.
02:37So the core question remains,
02:40in a democracy built on checks and balances,
02:42is the judiciary beyond criticism?
02:45Bureau Report, India Today.
02:55All right, the latest news break coming in on this.
02:57Prime Minister has stepped in.
02:59He's expressed anguish over the NCRT row.
03:02He was upset over the judicial corruption chapter.
03:06Modi has slammed judicial graph lessons to kids.
03:09Modi, during meeting, he had a cabinet meeting today and he said,
03:13what are we teaching students and judges?
03:15Who is overseeing NCRT textbook content?
03:18The Prime Minister wants accountability fixed in the NCRT row.
03:22Let me also give you a backdrop.
03:24NCRT, since the publishing of the chapter, has expressed regret.
03:27They have called back the books.
03:2938 books are now still in circulation.
03:32They have called those books back.
03:33You have the Education Minister, Mr. Dharmendra Pradhan,
03:36who's openly come out, issued an apology.
03:38But all of this clearly did not go down well
03:41with the Supreme Court issuing scathing observations today,
03:45taking down where the NCRT is concerned.
03:59All right, I want to immediately cut across to Justice Madan Lokur,
04:02former judge, Supreme Court.
04:04He's joining us.
04:04Appreciate you taking the time out and joining us, Justice Lokur.
04:07Your first reaction on the Supreme Court lashing out against the NCRT,
04:12though the NCRT has apologized, so has the Education Minister.
04:16What do you make of the latest controversy, Justice Lokur?
04:21Well, you see, it's like this.
04:23There was really no occasion for NCRT to bring in a chapter on corruption
04:30in the judiciary in the Class 8 textbook.
04:35From what I understand, in the previous editions of the textbook,
04:42the role of the judiciary in society had been mentioned.
04:46Now, they've suddenly included a chapter on corruption in the judiciary.
04:51Where was the need for that?
04:53And what is NCRT trying to suggest?
04:58You know, that the judiciary in India is corrupt.
05:03The judges are appointed by the President of India.
05:06Is NCRT trying to suggest that the President of India appoints corrupt persons as judges?
05:12What are they trying to suggest?
05:14So, I'm glad the Honourable Chief Justice of India has taken surmoto cognizance of this.
05:23And, you know, let's see where it goes.
05:28Justice Lokur, allow me to give out a contrarian opinion on this,
05:31which many are echoing today.
05:32While the judiciary, as you said, sir, is a vital pillar of our democracy,
05:36the arbiter of the Constitution.
05:38But there is an argument.
05:40That is why the judiciary should be above board.
05:42There are no holy cows or sacred cows where a democracy is concerned.
05:46There have been cases of judicial corruption.
05:48We've seen in the very recent past.
05:51Why should that not be taught to children?
05:55Well, the judicial discussion is above criticism.
06:02You know, I mean, if a judge does something wrong,
06:07he can always be, there's an in-house procedure to discipline the judge.
06:11If that doesn't help, if it is something very serious that is wrong,
06:15there is an impeachment process.
06:18But you can't, you know, pinprick the judiciary
06:21and say that whatever you're doing, you know, is wrong.
06:27And, you know, make it into a sort of a habit that, you know,
06:32if something happens, well, you, you know, pinprick the judiciary
06:36and say that, listen, you guys are corrupt.
06:39What is the message that is being sent?
06:42You know, we have to look at that.
06:43And it's not a message to adults or to, you know, college-going students.
06:49It's to Class 8 students.
06:52So it's not a question about the judiciary not being accountable.
06:56That's not the question.
06:58The question is, what is the message that is being sent?
07:03Justice Lokur, I hear you when you say that Class 8 students' impressionable minds
07:07are taught about a corrupt judiciary or the possibility of this.
07:11There are many, Justice Lokur, that today,
07:13who think that there is an insidious propaganda against the judicial branch
07:17and that a lot has happened in the recent past to confirm the same.
07:21And this is part of the same propaganda.
07:26You see, I think what has been happening over the last couple of years,
07:30it's not something that's happened only in the recent past.
07:33I think in the last couple of years,
07:35there has been a lot of executive interference in the affairs of the judiciary,
07:42particularly in the appointment process.
07:45All right.
07:46So persons who have been recommended for being appointed as judges,
07:50the government has not acted upon those recommendations
07:54or they have either withheld those recommendations
07:57or they have rejected those recommendations.
08:00So there is this, I will not say insidious,
08:05but there is this, you know, targeting of the judiciary
08:09to make it an independence mukt judiciary, right?
08:17The judiciary should be committed.
08:21It is something which Mrs. Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister tried
08:24and which is something which I'm afraid is being tried at the moment.
08:29And to some extent, there has been some success.
08:32Justice Lokur, the judiciary and the top court in this instance
08:36has shown judicial activism by taking suwamoto cognizance,
08:39which came at the behest of Mr. Kapil Sibbal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi,
08:43who flagged this chapter to the top court.
08:46And therefore, suwamoto action was taken.
08:49But why do we not see similar kind of activism by the judiciary in other cases?
08:54And I'll give you an example.
08:56Petitioners who had gone to court regarding the NCRT again
08:58on chapters being removed where, you know, the history is concerned,
09:04where protests in India's modern history is concerned,
09:06be it the Chipko movement or Nazism,
09:08they were allowed to withdraw consecutively.
09:11And lots of civil rights activists believe that this is the duty of the judiciary
09:15also to step in at these times.
09:17Where does the activism fall short when it is about, you know,
09:21cuts in NCRT books which could impact impressionable minds,
09:25but when it came down to impacting the judiciary,
09:28only then did the court step in?
09:31Yes, it is.
09:32It is.
09:33You know, the right to protest is a fundamental right that is guaranteed
09:37as long as it's a peaceful protest.
09:40All right.
09:41So if the Supreme Court has failed or if any court has failed
09:44to protect that fundamental right,
09:46it's a problem.
09:49But that has got nothing to do with corruption.
09:53You know, I mean, what is NCRT trying to say?
09:58I mean, they've not talked about protests and all that in this particular chapter.
10:02They've talked about corruption.
10:03Where was the need for that?
10:05Where was the occasion for that?
10:09Justice Lukur, I'd like to circle back to the question I asked you earlier.
10:12So, you know, do you look at this maybe as like what many suggest,
10:17a concerted position of trying to discredit the judiciary?
10:24The view of NCRT, their director,
10:28and he did not explain anything.
10:31You know, I mean, he didn't even respond.
10:33Why should that happen?
10:35I mean, if the NCRT thinks they're doing the right thing,
10:39they should have responded to Indian Express and said,
10:41well, this is, you know, what our view is.
10:44So it's clearly, clearly targeting the judiciary.
10:49All right.
10:50Appreciate you taking the time out and joining us, Justice Lukur.
10:52Thank you so much.
10:53I'm joined right now by Dr. Rashwini Kumar,
10:55former Union Minister and Law Justice of India.
10:58Thank you, Dr. Kumar, for joining us this evening.
11:01Your quick reactions on the Supreme Court coming down heavy,
11:03rejecting the apology of NCRT
11:05over the chapter on corruption in judiciary.
11:11Well, I think it's a decisive pushback by the judiciary
11:15against what it sees as an attempt to denigrate it
11:19and to compromise with the administration of justice.
11:21I personally believe that the sweeping
11:26and inferential indictment of judiciary
11:28in the subchapter that is under challenge
11:31in the NCRT curricula is reprehensible
11:34and I think needed to be curbed with a strong hand,
11:38which the judiciary has now done.
11:41I have no doubt that this case would be used by the judiciary,
11:45hopefully, to lay down guidelines for the future
11:49so that no institution of our constitutional democracy
11:54is subject to a sweeping indictment
11:57without any empirical evidence whatsoever.
11:59I believe that the matter raises a much more fundamental question
12:04about the resilience
12:06and about the integrity of the institutions
12:10of India's libertarian democracy.
12:12Supreme Court, or for that matter,
12:14any court or any institution,
12:16be it parliament or the executive,
12:19could be faulted for certain and specific missteps,
12:22but a sweeping indictment of any constitutional institution
12:27is wholly unacceptable
12:30and is a constitutional heresy.
12:33But Dr. Kumar, in a democracy,
12:36there are no sacred cows.
12:37Why should the judiciary be above questioning?
12:40There have been recent cases of corruption
12:42that have been very evident
12:43and why shouldn't children learn on that?
12:46Why should the judiciary be above question?
12:52Well, there is no doubt
12:53that there are aberrations in every institution,
12:56as I said in my opening statement,
12:58and there are processes to deal with those aberrations.
13:01There are processes to deal with those cases,
13:03as indeed has been done in several cases.
13:06However, the judiciary as an institution
13:09is much wider than the specific instances
13:13of missteps or wrongdoing.
13:15So therefore, to raise perception
13:22founded on certain instances
13:25to the level of reality and the ultimate truth
13:28is wrong.
13:29And what is worse is that children of impressionable age
13:33are sought to be told about corruption
13:38as if it was a gospel truth.
13:41There are instances of wrongdoing
13:43and in every country, in every institution,
13:46and they cannot be defended.
13:48Of course not.
13:49And the judges have suffered flat.
13:52They have taken censor
13:54and they have been subjected to scrutiny
13:56in various other forms.
13:57But to teach in the classrooms of the eighth class
14:01that the judiciary as an institution
14:04is corrupt inferentially is wholly wrong.
14:09Just imagine what happens to the right to reputation
14:13and dignity of a vast majority of our judges
14:16with impeccable credentials.
14:18What happens to them?
14:20What about their right?
14:21So right of free speech or right of censor
14:25is constitutionally subject to certain restrictions.
14:29And the Supreme Court would have done well
14:32to ensure that there is no whole-scale denigration
14:36or tarnishing of the image of the institution.
14:40The Chief Justice has taken the right step
14:43at the right time in calling those to account
14:46who are responsible for such a misstep.
14:50Well, Dr. Kumar, let me ask you this.
14:52The top court has taken Suomoto cognizance of this,
14:55shown judicial activism,
14:56which, if you look back, is subjective.
15:00You know, they are the conscience keeper of democracy,
15:03but having said that, in the case of NCRT,
15:05this is not the first case where entire chapters,
15:08you know, there has been stuff which has been contentious.
15:10Chapters have been removed earlier,
15:12not just on history, on protest.
15:15The top court of this country has not been as proactive
15:18in those cases as it's been
15:20when it came down to its own position
15:22and the question on its own institutionality.
15:27Well, better late than never.
15:29I wouldn't have minded if they had been active earlier as well.
15:33But there always comes a tipping point.
15:36And I think if this is a tipping point for the judiciary,
15:39so be it.
15:39And hopefully the activism of the court
15:42will not be limited only when it comes to
15:44questions about corruption and judiciary.
15:46They will be as active in correcting aberrations
15:50in other institutions.
15:51I have no problem with that proposition.
15:55But two wrongs don't make a right.
15:57Or let's say,
15:58let's say if there's been some latitude in other cases,
16:02it doesn't mean that you continue to keep giving a latitude.
16:05So therefore, I think at some point of time,
16:07you have to take a call.
16:09But this was, I'll tell you,
16:11this is a standalone case in the sense
16:13that nowhere, at least to my knowledge,
16:16has in any constitutional democracy,
16:20a chapter been added in the school curricula
16:23to say that a particular institution,
16:26which is a vital pillar of democracy in that country,
16:30as indeed it is in ours,
16:31is corrupt as an institution, as a whole.
16:34I think this is the only example of its kind
16:37if my memory doesn't fail me.
16:40Therefore, extreme cases require urgent measures.
16:45And the Supreme Court, I'm glad,
16:47has risen to the occasion.
16:49And I'm sure that this would not be,
16:51this would become a precedent for the Supreme Court
16:54to check similar insidious propaganda
16:58against other institutions
17:00and in other places as well.
17:02There has to be some empirical basis
17:05in the discovery of truth.
17:07That is the fundamental principle
17:09of judicial adjudication.
17:11There has to be some factual basis for this.
17:14Now, just because four, five, eight, ten
17:17out of thousands of judges
17:19have been found
17:21private shy, guilty of some wrongdoing,
17:23does not mean that you have the right
17:25to tarnish the institution as a whole.
17:27That's the issue.
17:28That's the point of principle I'm trying to make.
17:30Nothing more, nothing less.
17:32Okay, fair point.
17:33Dr. Kumar, thank you for joining us this evening.
17:36Let's get a contrarian point of view right now
17:38because we've had Justice Lokal,
17:40we've had the former law minister, Dr. Kumar,
17:42both of them coming out
17:43and suggesting that the judiciary
17:44has done exactly the right thing
17:46by taking sober motor cognizance.
17:48Young, impressionable mind in the eighth grade
17:50cannot learn that one of the tallest pillars
17:54of our democracy could be corrupt.
17:56You know, it's not college students,
17:58but young, impressionable minds.
18:00Joining me right now is J.S. Rajput,
18:03Mr. J.S. Rajput, educationist,
18:05and he's been the former director of the NCRT.
18:07Thank you, sir, for joining us this evening.
18:10You've heard the two comments earlier.
18:13What's your take on the Supreme Court today,
18:16rejecting the apology by the NCRT
18:19and harsh criticism of the NCRT
18:22on adding a chapter on corruption
18:25in the judiciary for the eighth standard?
18:29I am of the opinion that this issue
18:32could have been handled in a much better manner.
18:35If somebody had mentioned
18:37in the Honorable Supreme Court
18:38about the particular chapter,
18:41the first thing was
18:44to ask the NCRT
18:46to let the Honorable Court know
18:48why did they decide to have this chapter?
18:50What was the thinking behind it?
18:52What is their intent?
18:53And that could have been examined.
18:55Heaven should not have fallen
18:56if it had taken two, three days.
18:59After all, judiciary is known for delays.
19:02And we are adjusted to it.
19:05The Supreme Court's observations
19:09have unfortunately
19:11lowered the image of the NCRT.
19:13That was not necessary.
19:15This is one particular chapter.
19:17They have more than 250 books
19:19to prepare for
19:20whenever there is new syllabus.
19:21It's a great responsibility.
19:24No doubt,
19:25they have to read every word,
19:26every comma, full stop.
19:28This is the responsibility of the NCRT.
19:31And therefore,
19:32they have to be very careful.
19:34And when I was the director of NCRT,
19:36we all were very careful.
19:38We had such glitches.
19:39But we amended them.
19:41We were kitsized in the Parliament of India,
19:44eight hours in Lok Sabha,
19:46six hours in Raj Sabha.
19:47But we could say that
19:51why we have done this.
19:52And we were given an opportunity
19:54by everybody who was kitsizing us.
19:56This time, unfortunately,
19:59I'm sure
20:00most of the Supreme Court judges
20:01must also have read NCRT books
20:04and they would have
20:05a sense of gratitude to the NCRT.
20:07The whole country respects NCRT
20:09and therefore,
20:11it is about national responsibility
20:12to ensure
20:13that the dignity of NCRT
20:15is not compromised
20:16because
20:17something has crept into it.
20:19I fully agree
20:20it should not have been done.
20:21But the manner
20:22it has been handled
20:24does not,
20:25and I have,
20:26I'm saying it
20:27with full responsibility,
20:29has not been handled
20:32keeping in view
20:33the dignity
20:33of the institutions.
20:35I'm sure
20:36they stand
20:37humiliated
20:38before the country.
20:39This was not required.
20:40This could have been avoided.
20:42Particularly
20:42by such an august body
20:45of the country,
20:46the Supreme Court of India
20:47for which
20:47each one of us
20:48tremendous amount of respect.
20:51This is my general opinion.
20:53They could have
20:54handled it.
20:55I think
20:56in my own opinion,
20:57I'm a teacher.
20:58I know
20:59how things
21:00should be
21:02implemented.
21:02I teach
21:03how conflict
21:03resolutions
21:04are to be handled.
21:06And therefore,
21:07I'm very firm
21:08about my view
21:09that there would have
21:10been a better way
21:12of handling
21:12this whole issue.
21:14Mr. Rajput,
21:15you seem to suggest
21:16that while
21:16the Supreme Court
21:17thinks,
21:18and it is an institution,
21:19a tall institution
21:20in our country,
21:21you seem to suggest
21:22so is the NCRT.
21:24So by saying
21:25what the court has
21:26and taking
21:26Suomoto cognizance,
21:28the court
21:29has demeaned
21:30the institution
21:31of the NCRT.
21:35I am of the opinion
21:37that if the Supreme Court
21:38is the conscious
21:38keeper of the country,
21:40NCRT is the maker
21:41of the future of India,
21:43the future generations.
21:46NCRT has the responsibility
21:47to create the future
21:48of India
21:48and everybody
21:50will acknowledge this.
21:51So these two
21:52August bodies
21:53must have mutual
21:55respect for each other.
21:56After all,
21:57one can point out
21:58several instances.
22:00Take the instance
22:01of Justice Verma
22:02who has been
22:03sitting idle
22:04at his residence
22:05and the Supreme Court
22:06has not been able
22:07to resolve it.
22:08Why this delay?
22:09Similarly,
22:10if some glitch happens,
22:11nobody can comment
22:12on the Supreme Court.
22:13But if the NCRT
22:15does it,
22:16it has to be
22:17treated with
22:17tremendous amount
22:18of respect.
22:19It has such an experience
22:20of 1961 onwards.
22:22One of the most
22:23honored and respected
22:24organization of India
22:26internationally
22:26is the NCRT.
22:28We have the expertise.
22:29We have the experts.
22:31Every word
22:32is seen by some,
22:34not one person,
22:35but so many other
22:36stages are there.
22:38I certainly
22:39would repeat
22:41that Supreme Court
22:42has done it
22:43in a hurry.
22:45They could have
22:46done it
22:46in a much better way.
22:48I think that
22:49should suffice.
22:51Mr. Rajput,
22:52you say that
22:52the top court,
22:53Apex court,
22:54acted hastily
22:55and could have handled
22:56the situation
22:56better,
22:57differently.
22:57Now,
22:58there is a huge
22:59section out there
22:59that is of the opinion,
23:01Mr. Rajput,
23:02that this is all part
23:04of a concerted effort
23:06and a propaganda
23:07which the NCRT
23:08has been roped into
23:10to play into the narrative
23:11to discredit the judiciary
23:13bit by bit.
23:16No,
23:17I think the reverse
23:18could also be said.
23:19The reverse is happening
23:20now.
23:21The NCRT
23:21has been discredited
23:22for a fault
23:24which is not
23:24of that
23:25measured in magnitude.
23:26Every year
23:27in NCRT,
23:28there is a practice
23:29that we receive
23:30suggestions
23:30on every book
23:31from students,
23:32from teachers,
23:33from academics,
23:34from scholars.
23:35They are examined
23:36throughout the year
23:38and when the reprint
23:39takes place,
23:40all of them
23:40are corrected
23:42and the modifications
23:43are made.
23:44So,
23:45I think
23:46perhaps this is
23:48work of the experts.
23:49Now,
23:49NCRT
23:50should not be expected
23:51to go to Supreme Court
23:52to get an approval.
23:54They have their realm.
23:57They work in judiciary.
23:58They are the conscience
23:59keeper.
24:00But NCRT
24:01is the maker
24:02of the future of India.
24:03If you humiliate it,
24:05you are in fact
24:06somebody,
24:07you are
24:08diminishing
24:08the structure
24:09of that body
24:10and as a former
24:11director of the NCRT
24:13and a professor
24:14of 52 years
24:15standing,
24:16I feel
24:18saddened
24:19and disappointed.
24:22All right,
24:22Mr. Rajput,
24:23thank you
24:23for joining us
24:24this evening
24:25and giving us
24:25your point of view
24:26quite contrarian
24:26to the other two guests
24:27that we had
24:28but that is
24:29the beauty
24:30of a democracy
24:31where you have
24:32contrarian points
24:33of views.
24:34Yes.
Comments