Legal Stalwarts Remember the Legend Ram Jethmalani; also Debate on the Pros and Cons of Media Trial

To commemorate the first death anniversary of one of the finest lawyers India has ever seen, Parliamentarian, Academician, a legend in his own right -Mr. Ram Jethmalani, News X channel has come up with the first of edition of its series of lectures by India’s finest legal luminaries under one platform. While some called him an “incurable maverick”, a man with a high-quality brain, others refused to not box him as just a “brilliant criminal lawyer” rather they termed the legal legend as a great constitutional lawyer who had tremendous knowledge on every facet of law. The eminent lawyers not only spoke in length talking greatness of Mr Jethmalani but also spoke in length on the debate “Pros and Cons of Media trial.”

In his welcome address, Mahesh Jethmalani, an eminent lawyer himself and also the son of late Ram Jethmalani commenced the show talking of his father, introduced the outstanding panel of legal eagles who graced their presence, namely, Fali S Nariman, Padma Vibhushan, senior advocate, Soli J Sorabjee, the former attorney general of India, Ravi Shankar Prasad, mister of law & justice and IT, Justice N V Ramanna, Judge Supreme Court of India, KK Venugopal, Attorney General of India, Senior advocates of the Supreme Court of India-  C. Aryama Sundaram, Kapil Sibal, Harish Salve, and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India. Mahesh that this is a great acknowledgement of his legendary father’s legacy, he talked briefly on the debate whether or not media believes in justice through their trails. 

 Ram, a great public persona: Ravi Shankar Prasad

The first one to speak was Mr Ravi Shankar Prasad, Union Minister of Law, Justice and IT. He recalled his sterling nostalgic memories of Ram Jethmalani, as a law student in Patna. He said it was an honour and privilege to have assisted him on several cases in Delhi and Patna as a lawyer himself. He reminisced asking him on how Jethmalani coped with the struggle of partition migrating from Sindh to Mumbai, to which he replied, “I came with Rs 10 in my pocket with vision and ambition in my eyes.” Prasad said, “he had extraordinary conviction, outstanding criminal lawyer, parliamentarian and a fierce friend. “Ram apne usoolan pe zindagi jiye.” He further added that his ten questions on Bofors scandal astounded the nation. He was great orator both in English and Hindi, a great public persona.   

On the debate topic, he said that the investigation should be fair, it should also meet the expectation of people, emotions are at stake, the balance has to be achieved.

“Ram, a great Parliamentarian who inspired generations: Justice Ramanna

Justice Ramanna recollected his three-decade-old association with Mr Ram Jethmalani on many high profile cases since 1984 where he assisted him. He said he also had a close personal association with him. He said Ram was a great lawyer and parliamentarian who has inspired generations and will continue to do so. He abstained to comment on the debate topic because he is an acting judge in the Supreme Court of India and it will not deem fit to comment on the subject.

“Ram condemned corruption, formed a high powered committee to fight the same”: Venugopal

KK Venugopal reminisced that he knew Ram Jethmalani since 1975, he said Ram was a warrior who was brave and fearless. He said Ram was a great criminal lawyer, and not just proficient in criminal but also constitutional law and every branch of law. He said Ram was a Parliamentarian for six terms and condemned corruption, he formed a high powered committee to probe corruption at all levels. He was a phenomenal person, his contribution as a Parliamentarian will be remembered.

“Ram scripted his own life, lived unapologetically”: Tushar Mehta 

Tushar Mehta, the attorney general of India remembered Ram Jethmalani fondly as he worked, assisted and in certain cases opposed him. Ram is a phenomenon, a majestical learned lawyer, who acquired a unique stature in the legal fraternity, as a Parliamentarian, an educationist, as a human being. Mehta said the debate topic Media Trial- Pros and Cons was Ram’s favourite topic, no one could have been more critical of media trial as Ram was. Mehta said Ram scripted his own life, and lived unapologetically, unhindered by the norms of society. Ram was a great constitutional lawyer. He earned respect and reverence amongst his colleagues, fraternity. Ram was a legend and his legacy live on.

“Ram’s name guaranteed instant fame and success”: Nariman

Fali S Nariman, Padma Vibhushan, EX- Attorney General of India spoke greatly of Ram. He said, “We can’t sum up the success of Ram Jethmalani, his unstoppable practice for a record-breaking 80 odd years, starting his career at only 17 years of age.” He said India has lost one of its finest advocates. Nariman pointed out members of the bar had the joyful satisfaction of knowing Ram and that he left after setting a benchmark in legal proficiency.”He said Ram possessed brains of high quality, he would have liked to be remembered as a person who made a difference in the lives of younger people. He said Ram always found time to interact with students amidst his roaring practice, innumerable preoccupations prove his commitment.”

He said Ram made a hard-hitting speech during the emergency and he was sought after by police. His first name guaranteed instant fame. It gave him repute and riches. Now that he is no more, Nariman has a message, “We will keep remembering him in September, and we’ll proclaim it as Ram Jethmalani day.”

“ Ram enjoyed life and beauty, hope to meet him soon on the other side”: Sorabjee 

Soli Sorabjee- a jurist and former Attorney-General of India and Padma Vibhushan awardee, the 90-year-old great legal veteran, remembered Ram for his fondness and love for life. He said Ram was a man who enjoyed life and beauty. Soli said it is not possible to describe Ram in just three sentences, so he kept it short in his reminisces for Jethmalani.  He said Ram would often gift people books and bottles of wine, that was very typical of him. The nonagenarian lawyer hoped to see Ram on the other side of light. “I hope sooner or later I meet Ram when we can continue our arguments. Ram Ram Ram.

Media Trial an upturn to the Rule of law

Mainstream media coupled with social media has nose dived media trials”: Sibal

Congress Party leader and a renowned lawyer, Kapil Sibal, spoke highly of his senior colleague in Supreme Court Ram Jethmalani on how Ram did not advocate the media trial.  Sibal spoke in length the debate topic “Pros and Cons of Media Trial”. He said, “to bring it in the context, of constitutionally protected freedoms, Ram believed in the rule of law and not in the rule of dictates by men this is a subject that was very close to his heart.” He quoted the legendary lawyer on the subject, saying, “Oblate media act as a court passes judgment even before the court pronounces its verdict, trial by media

is nothing but breach of law it amounts to contempt of the court.” Sibal said trial by mainstream media’s influence is both constructive and destructive and when it comes to the social media, the destructive voices of demolition squads blares both the truth and false, it must be clearly defined and demarcated and a ‘Lakshman Rekha’ needs to be drawn.

Sibal said that the media should have a free hand but limited to discovery only. He continued saying that the problem arises when the media looks upon these discoveries of facts as a way of earning TRPs to gain more audience they bother less about the credibility of source they instead try to sensationalize the event even if it takes distortion of facts. Media verdicts are overshadowed by court decisions and with the entry of social media platforms the situation has nose-dived further. 

Sibal cited that in 2G case, the sensationalism by media led to the decline of the sector itself then what's then the dispensation of the report within the CNAG. In the meantime, so much damage was done into the telecom sector that today which was then earning profits which were providing efficient service motion is today under the name of almost 5000. Media should never be allowed to deliver verdicts lest it influences the processes of law.

Renowned lawyer, Harish Salve began his session by remembering fondly- his senior colleague- Mr Ram Jethmalani. He said that calling Ram an ace criminal law only means calling him his right better half. He said Ram’s capacity to make complex problems simple, was one of his great attributes.

Salve now came to debate topic and expressed his views on what is the state of disrepair of rule of law in India and how has the media generously contributed to the state of disrepair. Salve said the problem arises when the media becomes a parallel system of rule of noise. And where the rule of noise starts displacing the rule of law Indian criminal justice system in high profile cases has become a circus. Our agencies in a large number of cases are unable to probe so trial by a court of law. He said Sibal rightly pointed out that the media does not believe in any such thing called the law of evidence. The system governed by the rule of law by a judge authorized by the state has been replaced by a trial of embarrassment by the media.

Salve also pointed out that reputations in India don't matter, privacy is a virtue we scorn all in the name of transparency. He said this system has to be contained if India has to become a serious Republic. High profile cases in countries like the US, UK see the measured response, media in India should learn how a BBC or a CNN covers sensational cases. In India, nobody is willing to have a hard look as to what ails our system. He cited an example that in 2 G case, chairman of a large group of companies was treated like a common criminal. He said trial by media is a dangerous cocktail of mainstream media and social media where everybody has an opinion and anything written is the gospel truth.

He further added that this is not conducive to the rule of law, this atmosphere today is the single biggest impediment in India's growth story. Foreign companies don't want to invest in India because they feel one of India's greatest strengths was the largest English-speaking democracy with a robust rule of law. How can we fix the criminal justice system in India? “It cannot be fixed by the government because media houses are played by their hands, so we need to establish a tribunal which will try cases of defamation and deliver judgments in six months, this will to some extent tame the media ultimately. So the accountability of the media has to be brought through a system consistent with the rule of law,” said Salve. 

“No pros in Media trial, it is a toxic triangle of viewership, ratings and revenue”: Singhvi 

Abhishek Manu Singhvi, senior advocate and spokesperson of Indian National Congress and MP remembered Ram Jethmalani as a very large-hearted man and a fierce friend whose friendships cut across generations. “ Many of us here are decades younger than him but his friendships cut across generations as Ram was a fearless and fearsome person. I played Badminton with him at 5:30 in the morning and I lost to him every time.”

On the debate topic’ pros and cons of media trial, Singhvi said media has done sterling work in news gathering investigation bit the aberrations are getting bigger because Indian news has plummeted in the wrong direction of the equation between sense and sensationalism, between news and noise between civility and chaos.  “It is the toxic triangle of viewership,  the ratings game and revenue it becomes a heavy cocktail. Today the best substitute for thrillers is in certain television news programs,” said Singhvi. He said punishing many business houses, journalists and channels are still, fortunately, an exception and not the norm. Singhvi said that it’s the audience like you and me who has given this circus a great degree of legitimacy and strength divided we stand so we let the dog eat dog and let the devil take the hindsight.

Remedies to this menace is awareness, awareness of lapse, accountability, and urgent necessity. It must start with the paradox that external control has to be issued. The Press laws is a toothless tiger, the national broadcasting standards authority has fared better but remains vocally inadequate given the size and degree of the menace. Both these peer regulators should get their act together to control the media.

“Institutional failure has led Media to become a public court,” says C Arayama Sundaram, senior advocate, Supreme Court

A prominent lawyer, C Arayama Sundaram, who represents Board of Control for Cricket in India, Anil Ambani and several other high-profile clients at various judicial forums was the last guest to speak at the Memorial Lecture Series of Ram Jethmalani. With the paucity of time, Sundaram straight away spoke on the debate topic. He said the increased influence of the media in ongoing investigations and trials has overshadowed the investigation, trials and judgements by the judicial system in the worst way possible.

He stated that media rather than being an imparter of knowledge there is no such thing as subjects in it has now become the creator of public opinion and in certain cases, it has now become a crusade where instead of letting the guilty get away in nine cases out of ten just to save one innocent, today the media wants to say let nine innocent men be hanged but don't let that one getaway and we have a complete turn of the rule of law.

Sundaram reiterated what other speakers spoke earlier that media has now become the voice of the public, it is now the deciding factor of the way the people think. He said because of the failure of the other estates, the fourth estate i.e. the media will not be able to convert public opinion.

“ If there is an institutional failure in India because people have lost faith in the police, the prolonged judicial pronouncements, the public perception that the rich can find itself out of anything, the public perception is political pressures will come to bear. Media finds an opportunity to enter and take over and has become a self-proclaimed public court,” said Sundram. 

He concluded by saying that the media has started portraying itself as a court of public opinion and a decision-maker of what public opinion ought to be and should but underlying all that is the fact that the media is doing that because the public has lost faith in looking anywhere else.

 Mr Fali Nariman had the last word on the topic after hearing all the panellists, he said, “Perhaps we were too brash to abolish the jury system which represents the people in a criminal trial, not the civil Trials. If we talk about civil trials, an intellectual panel should express an opinion which would reflect public opinion and we have to seriously think about whether we should have a panel, not a jury  who would have given their verdicts because you can't prevent the public from forming an opinion and I don't think we are in a position to prevent the media from expressing their opinion either so we have to have some sort of an intellectual panel which will form a considered and thought-provoking opinion.”