Chief Justice-designate BR Gavai welcomes India-Pak's ceasefire amid tensions
Chief Justice of India-designate Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai has welcomed the ceasefire in the ongoing hostilities with Pakistan, just days before taking oath as the 51st Chief Justice of India. In an informal interaction with the media on Sunday, Justice Gavai expressed concern over global conflicts and emphasised the role of the judiciary in times of national crisis.'Yuddh ke kya disasters hain we have already seen. It's been three years since we have seen a war in Ukraine. Over 50 thousand have died. The other conflict in Gaza has seen many more casualties,' he said.Welcoming the ceasefire, he added, 'As a citizen of the country, everybody is concerned. Whatever happens, happens to everyone. Fortunately that there has been a ceasefire. By 12 tomorrow we will know more.'Justice Gavai, who will become India's first Buddhist Chief Justice, takes oath on Wednesday, two days after Buddha Purnima. "It is a great coincidence that I am taking oath the day after Buddh Purnima,' he said.Calling himself 'a totally secular person,' he spoke about his spiritual inclusivity. 'I believe in all religions. I have friends from all religions. I go to Hindu temples and Jain temples and churches and mosques," he added.He also recalled the Supreme Court's recent gesture of observing a two-minute silence on April 23 to mourn the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack. 'When the information came in newspapers about Pahalgam in the morning, we thought that we should show solidarity. The entire nation was in grief. We called a full court meeting at 2 PM with the permission of the CJI, who was out of India. We unanimously resolved to condemn it and stand in memory of the affected. When the country is in danger, the Supreme Court cannot be aloof. "We are also part of the same country, the same system,' he said.Justice Gavai credited his legal journey to the influence of Dr BR Ambedkar and his father, RS Gavai, a former Rajya Sabha member. 'I did not want to go into politics. My father said if you become a judge you can take Ambedkar's vision of socio-economic justice forward. My judgments, if you see, I have upheld the cause of social justice,' he said.He also reflected on his experiences as a judge visiting different parts of India, including violence-hit Manipur. Speaking of a visit to a relief camp during the unrest, he recalled, 'An old lady in the camp told us. Welcome to your Home.'While refraining from commenting on pending matters or his plans as CJI, Justice Gavai reaffirmed his commitment to constitutional supremacy. 'What's supreme is already known. It's the Constitution that is supreme,' he said..Justice Gavai is scheduled to be sworn in as Chief Justice of India on Wednesday, May 14.
advertisementIN THIS STORY#Supreme Court
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Madras High Court affirms LGBTQIA+ rights amid same-sex marriage rulings
The Madras High Court affirmed that LGBTQIA+ individuals can form families through alternative means, recognizing "chosen families." This ruling came as the court ordered the release of a lesbian woman forcibly separated from her partner, criticizing the police's insensitive handling of the case and emphasizing the right to choose one's path. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Madras High Court has ruled that while the Supreme Court has not legalized same-sex marriage , individuals within the LGBTQIA+ community can still form families through alternative means. The court emphasized that 'marriage is not the sole mode to find a family' and recognized the concept of a 'chosen family' as established within LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence.A division bench comprising Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan made these observations on May 22 while ordering the release of a 25-year-old lesbian woman who had been forcibly separated from her partner and subjected to harassment by her judges noted that not all parents are accepting, contrasting the detenue's mother unfavorably with Justice Leila Seth, who had publicly acknowledged and accepted her son's sexual orientation. 'The mother of the detenue is no Leila Seth. We understand her desire for her daughter to live a conventional heterosexual life, marry, and settle down. However, as an adult, the detenue is entitled to choose her own path,' the bench court also expressed discomfort with the term 'queer,' highlighting its dictionary definitions as 'strange' or 'odd' and questioned its appropriateness. 'For a homosexual individual, their sexual orientation is natural and normal. There is nothing strange about such inclinations. Why then should they be labeled queer?' the judges court criticized the local police for their insensitive handling of the case, particularly for compelling the detenue to return to her parents despite her wishes. The bench censured the police's 'rank inaction' and insensitivity, underscoring that government officials, especially police, have a duty to respond promptly and appropriately to complaints from LGBTQIA+ safeguard the detenue's rights, the court restrained her family members from interfering with her personal liberty and issued a writ of continuing mandamus directing the jurisdictional police to provide adequate protection to both the detenue and her partner, who had filed the habeas corpus petition.(With inputs from TOI)
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Trump bans travellers from 12 countries citing national security
Citing national security concerns, President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced that citizens from 12 countries would be banned from entering the United States and those from seven other countries would face restrictions starting Monday. The countries whose citizens have been banned are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Heightened restrictions will be imposed on travellers from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. The directive is part of an immigration crackdown launched by Trump in his second term. It includes the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelans to El Salvador over suspected gang ties, as well as moves to block certain foreign students from enrolling in American educational institutes and deport others. In a video posted on social media on Thursday, Trump said that the 'strength of the restrictions we're applying depends on the severity of the threat posed'. He clarified that the list can be revised if there were perceived improvements while also highlighting that more countries could be added if new threats emerge. Trump has tied the new travel restrictions to the terror attack on Sunday in Boulder, Colorado, where the suspect has been identified by officials as an Egyptian national who had allegedly overstayed his visa. Egypt, however, is not on Trump's restricted list. The White House said some of the countries on the list had 'deficient' screening and vetting processes or 'have also taken advantage of the United States in their exploitation of our visa system and their historic failure to accept back their removable nationals'. The US president said: 'We don't want them.' 'In my first term, my powerful travel restrictions were one of our most successful policies and they were a key part of preventing major terror attacks on American soil,' he said on social media. Trump had signed a similar order in 2017, during his first term in office, that went through several iterations before it was finally upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018, Reuters reported. Back then critics had called the ban a ' Muslim ban ' as the seven countries on the first list were Muslim majority. It was then revised to add two non-Muslim majority countries, North Korea and Venezuela, BBC reported. However, the ban was repealed in 2021 by Joe Biden, the president at the time, deeming it a 'stain on our national conscience'. On Thursday, Trump claimed that the countries were decided based on an analysis by the Department of Homeland Security that considered factors such as 'large-scale presence of terrorists, failure to cooperate on visa security, inability to verify travellers' identities, inadequate record keeping of criminal histories and persistently high rates of illegal visa overstays and other things'. 'President Trump is fulfilling his promise to protect Americans from dangerous foreign actors that want to come to our country and cause us harm,' White House Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told CBS News. The proclamation by the White House clarified that exceptions have been made for certain travellers from the list of countries including athletes travelling for major sporting events, such as the 2026 football world cup or the 2028 Summer Olympics, Afghan nationals holding Special Immigrant Visas and any 'lawful permanent resident' of the US. Besides, holders of 'immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran' and persons who have dual citizenship in countries not included in the travel ban will also be exempted. Further, the US secretary of state may grant exemptions to persons on a 'case-by-case' basis, if 'the individual would serve a United States national interest'.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Solution must not come at the cost of judicial independence: CJI Gavai
Chief Justice of India BR Gavai stated on Wednesday that while the Collegium system is not without criticism, any solution must not come at the cost of judicial independence. "There may be criticisms of the collegium system, but any solution must not come at the cost of judicial independence. Judges must be free from external control," he said. The statement came while he was speaking at a roundtable discussion at the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. CJI Gavai also justified the collegium system for appointment of judges in higher judiciary and pointed out that until 1993, it was the executive that had the final say in the appointment of judges. He said that during this period the executive superseded the senior-most judge in appointing CJI, which went against tradition. Talking about the credibility of courts, the CJI said that the legitimacy and public confidence are secured through the "credibility earned by the courts" and not through coercion of command. Erosion of this confidence risks weakening the judiciary's constitutional role as the ultimate arbiter of rights, he said. He also stated that in today's digital era, where perceptions are rapidly shaped, the judiciary must become 'accessible, intelligible, and answerable, without compromising its independence.' CJI Gavai also expressed concerns over judges accepting government appointments and contesting elections after retirement, he said that it raises 'ethical questions' and undermines public confidence in the judiciary. Speaking on the topic "Maintaining Judicial Legitimacy and Public Confidence," the CJI said every system, no matter how robust, is susceptible to professional misconduct issues. The CJI said transparency measures, such as the declaration of judges' assets, also bolster public confidence in the judiciary. Talking about accountability to people, he said that the Supreme Court maintains a portal where judges' declarations are made public, which shows that judges are willing to subject themselves to a degree of scrutiny. Talking about the role of the judiciary in democracy, he said that the judiciary must not only dispense justice, but also be seen as an institution that deserves to hold truth to power and the terms "judicial legitimacy" and "public confidence" are interconnected. With ANI and PTI inputs
