Former Union Law Minister Ashwani Kumar on Thursday said that the problem of judicial pendency has persisted across governments and that there are no easy solutions to it, due to the complexity of the system..Speaking at the launch of his book Guardians of the Republic: Essays on the Constitution, Justice, and the Future of Indian Democracy at the India International Centre, Kumar said,“All Law Ministers, to the best of their ability, have tried to do something or the other. But the system is so complex that for any one individual to find an answer is an impossibility. But that is not to say that we can't keep trying. ”He said that the scale of backlog points to a deeper institutional concern.“If we have the kind of backlog that we have, something is wrong and we have not been able to address it.”Kumar described justice as an aspirational goal.“Justice is a standard to achieve, but an ideal to reach.”.Political theorist Yogendra Yadav criticised the functioning of the Supreme Court, saying that the judiciary appears more responsive to issues such as textbook content than to ongoing violations of civil liberties. "What makes the apex court angry today are three sentences in a textbook.” Yadav went on to question the role of the judiciary in safeguarding constitutional rights.“Should we simply say courts should do justice? Or should we say the judiciary today is failing the Constitution of this country?” he asked.He said that the current situation goes beyond democratic decline.“We are not experiencing democratic backslide. That is describing cancer as flu. We are experiencing a dismantling of our republic, nothing short of that,” Yadav said.He attributed the lack of resistance to fear.“One very simple reason is fear,” he said, also pointing to the role of propaganda in shaping public response..Congress MP Shashi Tharoor placed the discussion in a broader democratic context and warned that constitutional decline is often gradual rather than dramatic.“More often, they're gradually diminished through small departures from principles, the quiet weakening of norms and the steady normalisation of what was once considered exceptional or even wrong...So Ashwani Kumar's essays are drawing our attention in many ways to the subtle process of erosion that's taking place.”He added that the strength of a republic lies not merely in its institutions, but in how they function.“They suggest that the health of a republic cannot be measured only by the endurance of its institutions, but by the integrity with which they function.”Tharoor warned that legal structures alone are not enough.“Laws may remain intact, but if the spirit that animates them begins to fade, the Constitution risks becoming form without substance.”He also cautioned that institutions may survive even while being weakened and said that the book ultimately underscores the role of vigilance.“It is this concern that democracy depends as much on vigilance as on design, and on our restraint as well in operating it that runs right through the book.”.Moderator Neera Chandhoke said that the book reflects concern over the widening gap between the ideals of the freedom struggle and contemporary political practice.She also highlighted the importance of engaging with constitutional values in normative terms, referring to the tension between “what is” and “what should be.”.Author Gurcharan Das framed the issue as a political dilemma.“As a liberal, my big problem is that I have no one to vote for,” he said.He said that he found himself unable to support either side of the political spectrum, reflecting what he described as a wider dilemma among voters who feel unrepresented.He also flagged concerns about judicial backlog and undertrial incarceration.Das also touched upon the importance of protecting free speech, even in difficult or uncomfortable situations, underscoring that democratic systems must tolerate dissent to remain meaningful..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
