Majesty of SC affected by its response: Over 450 lawyers write to SCBA President registering protest over Prashant Bhushan contempt verdict

A statement addressed to the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave has questioned the way in which Advocate Prashant Bhushan was charged with contempt of court by the Supreme Court's August 14 verdict..The statement, issued by lawyers, condemns the charges laid against Advocate Bhushan whilst assailing the manner in which the proceedings progressed. ."The majesty of the Supreme Court of India is not affected so much by criticism, as it is by its own response to it.Lawyers in their letter to SCBA.Contempt proceedings had been initiated against Bhushan in respect of two of his tweets, apart from another contempt case already pending since 2009. On August 14, the top Court found Bhushan guilty of contempt of Court for his tweets. .Breaking: Supreme Court holds Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt of court for his tweets, hearing on sentence to be held on August 20.In doing so, the lawyers in their letter state that the Court did not afford Advocate Bhushan an opportunity to put on record a more detailed affidavit defending himself..In Advocate Bhushan's first reply-affidavit, he had delineated his reasons for his tweets while seeking more time to file a more detailed version, the letter states. This opportunity was not provided, the signatories point out. As a result, the matter was "hurriedly taken up against him and finally decided.".In a deviation from the established procedure, the consent of the Attorney- General to prosecute the contempt petition, which was first filed by an Advocate, Mahek Maheshwari, was not obtained, the letter highlights. Despite the Attorney-General being served notice, his views were "never sought by the Court", it is explained further..The signatories also question the initiation of prosecution for contempt amid the pandemic. A second concern raised in the letter pertains to the hurried hearing of the eleven-year-old contempt case pending against Bhushan..In case you have any grievance against a judge, what should be the process?Supreme Court asks in 2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case.The letter states in this regard, "an eleven year old contempt case against Mr Prashant Bhushan was suddenly taken up out of turn and hurriedly listed for a final hearing ... Moreover, there was no apparent urgency to the matter, since it had already been pending for eleven years.".It is noted that the pleas of the lawyers representing Advocate Bhushan seeking the deferral of proceedings till the resumption of regular court functioning was disregarded. .The voluminous court records sought to be produced could not be effectively presented in a virtual hearing, it is further argued. These issues were "not only glossed over by the court but summarily dismissed without giving any reasons", the letter states..If such an attack is not dealt with, it may affect national honour and prestige: Supreme Court in Prashant Bhushan contempt verdict.The signatories express that the Constitutional guarantee of a free and fair hearing did not seem to be complied with in a case to which the Supreme Court was a party.."If the highest court of the country that is the repository of the best of our constitutional values does not follow due process in a case where it is also a party and, fails to maintain fair play or instill confidence, the adverse consequences on rule of law will be irreversible."the signatory-lawyers state..The letter additionally registers protest over the "cherry-picking" of cases during the pandemic, submitting that it creates a "negative impression about the Court"..On the Bhushan contempt judgment's impact on the right to free speech and expression, the letter adds:."Having recognised the right to freedom of speech and expression on several recent occasions, the Hon’ble Court must show the same sensitivity and circumspection before issuing criminal contempt in a case that has a bearing on its own tolerance to speech. Invoking of the ‘iron hand’ by the Constitutional Court of India to respond to criticism in speech, should be reviewed.".In the concluding paragraph, the signatories urge the SCBA to contest the concerns surrounding a proper hearing in the matter. .They also request that the video link for the "sentencing hearing" scheduled for August 20 is shared so that the hearing is symbolically held in ‘open court’, and those advocates who wish to attend the matter may be allowed to be present and seen on-screen..Over 450 lawyers have signed the letter. .Read the Letter here: