Deve Gowda hits out at BJP for questioning Kumaraswamy's US trip
Bengaluru, Jun 30: JD(S) patriarch H D Deve Gowda Sunday attacked the BJP for objecting to Karnataka Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy's ongoing visit to the US, asking whether he should have sought permission for it from saffron party chief B S Yeddyurappa.
Gowda said his son had gone to the US for the groundbreaking ceremony of Vokkaliga community's Kalabhairaveshwara temple.
"He has not gone for anything else. Our community's Adichunchanagri seminary's Kalabhairaveshwara temple is there. No one from here has given money, Vokkaligas in America have gathered Rs 20 crore for it," Gowda told reporters.
"Is Yeddyurappa's (state BJP chief) permission required for it? What is wrong in going for three days...is it a joke?"
He was responding to a query over senior BJP leader and former deputy chief minister K S Eshwarappa questioning the chief minister's priorities and the number of days he was spending in the US.
"If someone asks chief minister about it he will question whether you have voted for me, rename your party from Janata Dal Secular to unquestionable Janata Dal," Eshwarappa had tweeted Saturday night.
The BJP has been questioning the priorities of the Congress-JD(S) coalition government at a time when most parts of the state are reeling under a severe drought.
It has also termed the chief minister's 'Grama Vastavaiya' (overnight stay in villages) programme, aimed at making the administration more effective, a "political drama", and has asked him to instead tour drought affected areas to assess the ground situation.
Ahead of his departure from here on June 28, Kumaraswamy had tweeted, "Heading to the USA to take part in two private functions" and he gave details of the programmes.
Besides taking part in the temple ceremony, he is slated to address a convention of Vokkaligas Parishath on July 5.
Meanwhile, Kumaraswamy in a tweet Sunday said, "I will attend the Compete with China Investor Meet on Business Opportunities in Karnataka, organised by Kannadigas in Washington DC and New York on July 2 and 4. The government is keen on driving investment to the state, especially to its tier 2 and 3 cities."
He also shared pictures of the temple groundbreaking ceremony on Twitter.
Gowda, replying to a question, said the JD(S)'s proposed statewide footmarch aimed at strengthening the party after its rout in the Lok Sabha polls will be organised in such a way that it does not cause any threat to the coalition government in the state.
"...without causing threat to coalition government, without hurting anyone's sentiments it will be organised...I will personally look into the preparations and flag it off," he said.
JD(S)'s padayatra announcement in the backdrop of Gowda's recent remarks about mid-term polls in Karnataka had caused a flutter in the political circles, especially its alliance partner Congress.
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.
Bengaluru (PTI): Justice B V Nagarathna of the Supreme Court on Saturday called for the creation of a judicial reforms commission to reduce mounting pendency in the courts, saying systemic incentives across stakeholders were contributing to delays in justice delivery.
She was speaking at the Supreme Court Bar Association's (SCBA) first National Conference on the theme "Reimagining judicial governance: strengthening institutions for democratic justice" here.
Nagarathna, who was part of the panel session addressing "From Pendency to Prompt Justice: Rethinking Justice Delivery in Indian Courts," said, this reforms commission must have membership not only from the judiciary of the Supreme Court, the High Court, as well as the District judiciary, but also have members from the Bar, Attorney General, Solicitor General, and also certain members representing the Bar at the institutional level, such as the Bar President, and from the government side to enable an inter-institutional dialogue on reducing pendency.
She reflected that, from the point of view of various stakeholders, a litigant gains from the status quo, to proceed to prolong proceedings.
ALSO READ: A political legacy, but no win yet: Padmaja Venugopal''s new fight in Thrissur
"A lawyer or an advocate loves adjournments and postponement because he/she benefits from per appearance and extended timelines. A government department reduces bureaucratic risk by appealing rather than accepting defeat.
"A judge, and particularly a trial judge, is always acting with caution because he/she is confronted with appellate reversal, and therefore he/she prefers procedural caution rather than having an aggressive docket control. Each of these decisions is individually rational, but how does it help the system? It is only leading to systemic delay," she added.
In order to break this equilibrium, Justice Nagarathna said that what is required is institutional interventions through a judicial commission to reduce pendency, rather than merely exhorting better conduct from judges, adherence to procedural timelines, asking advocates not to seek adjournments, urging the government to reduce litigation, or expecting courts to function round the clock and judges not to take leave.
On pendency, the judge questioned the inclusion of defective filings in court statistics, suggesting that such cases should not be counted until they are procedurally ready for hearing.
She also underlined the role of the government as the "largest generator of litigation", noting that officials tend to file appeals to avoid scrutiny, even in cases where disputes could be settled earlier. This, she said, results in cases travelling through multiple judicial levels unnecessarily.
"The government publicly expresses concern about judicial backlog, while simultaneously feeding that backlog through relentless litigation," she observed.
Justice Nagarathna further claimed judicial capacity is constrained by inadequate public investment, including delays in appointment of judges, lack of infrastructure and insufficient use of technology.
Among the measures suggested, she called for improved case management, curbs on unnecessary adjournments, adoption of technology, prioritisation of cases, promotion of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and creation of specialised benches.
She also urged advocates to adhere to professional and ethical standards, litigants to avoid frivolous appeals, and the government to adopt a practical litigation policy and ensure timely funding and appointments in the judiciary.
