Criminalisation of politics has to end
Politics has come a long way from the one that was practiced by Gandhi, Nehru and AKG. It has been at least three decades since money and muscle power has been dictating the terms of politics in the country. Our assemblies have become safe haven for criminals after globalisation, liberalization and privatization set in.
According to a report by the Association for Democratic Research one third of our politicians in both houses are facing serious criminal allegations against them.
About 35 % of the chief ministers are facing serious criminal cases. This news is very detrimental to India's democracy. In this context the Supreme Court has said the Parliament should draught a policy that would discourage people with criminal cases or background from contesting in the elections. General or Assembly Elections being Far Cry people are finding it difficult to even contest the local elections without the power of money and muscle in this background Supreme court's ruling is more than welcome.
Everybody Talks about decriminalising the politics. But nobody has the solution to achieve this goal. Which is why the Supreme Court has thrown this ball into the court of the Parliament.
People with backgrounds in real estate stone and sand mafias are easily winning elections. This is causing massive disturbance in the tectonic plates of democracy. This is the reason supreme court has to enter into the scene and protect the sanctity of a democratic process. Is criminalisation of politics has occupied Panchayat level elections to Parliament level elections as well. People spend crores to contest urban body elections such as panchayat or municipality. One cannot even imagine how much would the general and assembly election candidates spend on their campaigning and related expenses.
According to an estimate, on an average, each candidate could be spending more than Rs 30 crore on the least possible estimate. A liberal estimate would shock the sane people into distress.
The one who spend money like water will ensure they make at least 100 times more than what they were forced to spend to win elections once they assume power. Majority of them would most certainly have criminal backgrounds. It is not easy to get them on track. During the government that ruled Karnataka between 2008 and 2013, people with criminal background occupied vantage positions. The ones who ran Ballari republic had posed a serious threat to democratic mode of administration in the state. This mining mafia had used its office and power to cover its illegal activities. This is not restricted to Karnataka alone. Such mafias control the Democratic institutions across India and in some cases across the world too. Having tasted the heady power, this mafia tried to alter electoral process and win last elections. Even now they try to buy over elected representatives to upset the current government. This being the reality, cleaning up politics is not an easy task even when the Supreme Court says so.
When all houses and assemblies are filled with elected representatives with criminal background, it's not only difficult to control their existence but also the entry of more such persons into mainstream politics. Drafting a policy is just one part of the challenge. It is essential to bring integrated change in electoral politics. People or voters also have a duty of rejecting candidates with criminal backgrounds. Political parties should deny tickets for candidates with criminal background.
This is not just the question of politics but a larger issue of national interest as well. Today this country needs clean politics more than ever. The poorest of the poor, farmers, Dalits, and common people have strived hard to protect this country's democracy. People will have to take proactive approach towards cleaning up the politics of this country. This problem will never be remedied by elected representatives, if we leave it to them. People will have to ensure mining and sand mafia beneficiaries, real estate thugs and evil communal politicians do not enter the temples of democracy.
People have to be made aware of their responsibility in this regard.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
CJI calls for 'unified judicial policy', use of technology to converge practices across courts
Jaisalmer (PTI): Pushing for a "unified judicial policy", Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said technology can help align standards and practices across courts, creating a "seamless experience" for citizens, regardless of their location.
He said high courts -- due to the federal structure -- have had their own practices and technological capacities, and "regional barriers" can be broken down with technology to create a more unified judicial ecosystem.
Delivering the keynote address at the West Zone Regional Conference in Jaisalmer, Kant proposed the idea of a "national judicial ecosystem" and called for an overhaul of India's judicial system with the integration of technology.
"Today, as technology reduces geographical barriers and enables convergence, it invites us to think of justice not as regional systems operating in parallel, but as one national ecosystem with shared standards, seamless interfaces, and coordinated goals," he said.
He emphasised how the role of technology in the judiciary has evolved over time.
"Technology is no longer merely an administrative convenience. It has evolved into a constitutional instrument that strengthens equality before the law, expands access to justice, and enhances institutional efficiency," he said, highlighting how digital tools can bridge gaps in the judicial system.
Kant pointed out that technology enables the judiciary to overcome the limitations of physical distance and bureaucratic hurdles.
"It allows the judiciary to transcend physical barriers and bureaucratic rigidities to deliver outcomes that are timely, transparent and principled," he said, adding that the effective use of technology can modernise the delivery of justice and make it more accessible to citizens across the country.
The CJI called for implementing a "unified judicial policy".
He said India's judicial system has long been shaped by its federal structure, and different high courts have their own practices and technological capacities.
"India's vast diversity has led to different high courts evolving their own practices, administrative priorities and technological capacities. This variation, though natural in a federal democracy, has resulted in uneven experiences for litigants across the country," he said.
Kant underscored that predictability is crucial for building trust in the judicial system.
"A core expectation citizens place upon the courts is predictability," he said, adding that citizens should not only expect fair treatment but also consistency in how cases are handled across the country.
He pointed to the potential of technology in improving predictability.
"Technology enables us to track systemic delays and make problems visible rather than concealed," he said.
By identifying areas where delays occur, such as in bail matters or cases involving certain types of disputes, courts can take targeted action to address these issues and improve efficiency, Kant said.
The CJI explained that data-driven tools could identify the reasons behind delays or bottlenecks, allowing for faster, more focused solutions.
"Technology enables prioritisation by flagging sensitive case categories, monitoring pendency in real time and ensuring transparent listing protocols," he said.
Justice Surya Kant also discussed the importance of prioritising urgent cases where delays could result in significant harm. He highlighted his recent administrative order that ensures urgent cases, such as bail petitions or habeas corpus cases, are listed within two days of curing defects.
"Where delay causes deep harm, the system must respond with urgency," he stated, explaining that technology can help courts identify and expedite such cases.
Kant also raised the issue of the clarity of judicial decisions.
He noted that many litigants, despite winning cases, often struggle to understand the terms of their judgment due to complex legal language.
"Although the orders had gone in their favour, they remained unsure of what relief they had actually secured because the language was too technical, vague or evasive to understand," he said.
He advocated for more uniformity in how judgments are written.
"A unified judicial approach must therefore extend to how we communicate outcomes," he said.
The CJI also discussed the role of AI and digital tools in improving case management. He pointed to the potential of AI-based research assistants and digital case management systems to streamline judicial processes.
"Emerging technological tools are now capable of performing once-unthinkable functions. They can highlight missing precedent references, cluster similar legal questions, and simplify factual narration," he said, explaining how these technologies can help judges make more consistent decisions.
He also highlighted tools like the National Judicial Data Grid and e-courts, which are already helping to standardise processes like case filings and tracking.
Kant reiterated that the integration of technology into the judicial process is not just about improving efficiency but about upholding the integrity of the system and strengthening public trust.
"The measure of innovation is not the complexity of the software we deploy, but the simplicity with which a citizen understands the outcome of their case and believes that justice has been served," he said.
