Arbitrary power thrives on ignorance, fear: Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Saturday said that scientific temper lays the foundation for the rule of law, since arbitrary power feeds on a society that does not question.

"I believe, scientific temperament lays the foundation for the rule of law. This is because arbitrary power thrives on ignorance, fear and unexamined belief," he said.

Justice Bhuyan was delivering the address at the 12th convocation ceremony of the University of Science and Technology Meghalaya (USTM).

He went on to set out what happens to a society that stops asking questions.

"A society that accepts claims without evidence is susceptible to superstitious beliefs and becomes vulnerable to mis-information. A society that fears questions becomes vulnerable to authoritarianism. A society that treats tradition as beyond scrutiny may fail to reform unjust practices," he said.

Referring to Article 51A of the Constitution, which makes developing a scientific temper a fundamental duty of every citizen, the judge said one need not be a scientist to develop it.

"Scientific temper or temperament is not confined to or developed in laboratories or scientific institutions. All that you need is the capacity to think rationally; what you say or think must be based on reason," he said, adding that its germination has to take place in the university.

He drew a direct line between science and law.

"Science is the art of reasoning, so also is law. Science is evidence based, so also is law," he said.

The Constitution, he added, has "transposed a deeply feudal society practising graded inequality into a modern forward looking society."

"Therefore, science and law are partners in the constitutional journey of our republic," he said.

Justice Bhuyan also warned against the politics of exclusion.

"Because of competing claims and societal conflicts we easily fall into the trap of exclusiveness. Willingly or unwillingly we get drawn into a false narrative; the binary of 'us' and 'they'," he said.

For a more just and humane society, he said, the narrative must shift from 'us' and 'they' to 'we', pointing out that the Preamble begins with the words "We, the People of India."

"The Constitution does not address only one section of India. It speaks to all citizens of India as equal members of the constitutional order," he said.

According to Justice Bhuyan, the genius of the constitutional 'we' is that "it does not seek to efface the differences; rather, it seeks to restore unity without demanding uniformity."

"Diversity, therefore, is not an impediment to the constitutional project; rather, it infuses substance and meaning to it," he said, describing this as the principle of fraternity that Dr BR Ambedkar called the heart and soul of the constitutional vision.

On the role of universities, the judge invoked former President Pranab Mukherjee's view that universities should be bastions of free thinking. He noted that he had "already spoken at length about free speech, dissent and tolerance" on earlier occasions.

"We should not close our windows but at the same time we should be cautious and be able to separate the grain from the chaff. Let there be free flow of knowledge because knowledge knows no boundary," he said.

Drawing on economist Amartya Sen's distinction between institutional and functional democracy, Justice Bhuyan said democracy is not exhausted by elections and representative institutions alone.

"This habit of public reasoning is the very essence of a healthy participatory democracy. But for that we need to have an informed citizenry. We can have an informed citizenry only when there is access to information. Therefore, information is the key," he said.

Justice Bhuyan concluded by saying that education, university, diversity and public reasoning are bound together by a common thread, and together "will guide us through the path to a just and equitable society which is the ultimate goal of our Constitution."