Does social media trolling affect judges? Former CJI Chandrachud replied

New Delhi: Former CJI of India DY Chandrachud has given a big statement regarding social media. he/she has said that some groups are trying to influence the results through social media. Judges need to be careful of these. he/she said that nowadays people form opinions on the basis of 20 second video watched on YouTube or any other social media platform, this is a big danger.

‘Right to form opinion on court decisions’

“Today there are some special interest groups, pressure groups who are trying to use social media to influence the opinion of the courts and the outcome of cases,” he/she said in a program on NDTV India. Every citizen has the right to understand the basis of a decision and the right to express his/her or her opinion on court decisions. However, when it goes beyond court decisions and targets a judge, it raises fundamental questions – is this really freedom of expression?’

‘People form opinions from 20 second videos’

he/she said, ‘So, everyone wants to form an opinion on whatever they see on YouTube or any social media platform in 20 seconds. This poses a serious threat, because the decision making process in the courts is much more serious. This is actually extremely complex, which no one on social media today has the patience or tolerance to understand and this is a very serious issue that the Indian judiciary is facing.

Does trolling affect judges?

Answering this question, he/she said whether ‘trolling’ on social media affects the judges. ‘Judges have to be very mindful of the fact that they are constantly under attack from special interest groups who are trying to change the decisions that are made in the courts,’ he/she said.

‘The job of making laws is for the legislature’

Justice Chandrachud also said that in a democracy, the power to decide the validity of laws has been entrusted to the constitutional courts. he/she said, ‘The rule is that the law making will be done by the legislature, the law will be implemented by the executive and the judiciary will interpret the law and settle the disputes. Many times it happens that there is confusion regarding jurisdiction. In a democracy, the job of policy making is entrusted to the government.

“When it comes to fundamental rights, the courts are bound to intervene under the Constitution,” he/she said. Policy making is the job of the legislature, but it is the job and responsibility of the courts to decide on its validity.

What did you say about the collegium system?

Defending the collegium system, the former CJI said that there is a lot of misunderstanding about the process and it is very nuanced and multi-layered. he/she said, ‘It is not that the judiciary has the sole role in the appointment of judges.’ he/she said that the seniority of the judges should be considered first.

Should judges go into politics?

Asked whether judges should enter politics, the former CJI said there was no bar in the Constitution or law to do so. he/she said, ‘Society sees you as a judge even after retirement, so what is good for other citizens will not be good for judges even after leaving the post.’ he/she said, ‘It is mainly for every judge to decide whether the decision taken by him/her after retirement will have an impact on those who evaluate the work done by him/her as a judge.’