ESPAN~OL -- una descripcion de una visitante al corto con M.C. Mehta
ENGLISH -- a description of a visit to court with M.C. Mehta
I observed M.C. Mehta's appearances on three different days in Delhi, during my time in India. This memo gives some impressions of the second of these visits.
LITIGATION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Almost without exception, advocates in the Supreme Court of India wear black gowns (robes), as well as starched white shirts with long, extended collars (or a bib, you could say) hanging down in front. M.C Mehta does wear the lawyer's shirt-and-bib, but he does not wear the gown. Instead, he simply appears in a plain black suit coat and striped gray lawyer pants.
Indian lawyers can be an argumentative lot. (No surprise there to the rest of us lawyers.) But I was also struck in both Bombay and Delhi about what I would consider a sometimes informal, even sometimes raucus, atmosphere that prevails in the jousting between lawyers and between the judge and the lawyers.
India is a society in which queues exist (for railway tickets, in lining up to get onto airplanes, etc.) but the race often goes to the swift and, frankly, the pushy. The queue forms, and then the battle truly begins. An elbow in the ribs is nothing. Those who are overly concerned with personal space had best stay at home.
The same is true, in a sense, even in the Supreme Court. A judge says something, and a lawyer jumps up to comment before he is finished. The judge says to sit down, and the lawyer continues, seeing how far he or she can push things. In my country, for a lawyer to cut off a judge while he or she is speaking would raise gasps in the courtroom, and probably an order of contempt of court by the judge. In India, it all seems to be accepted, and indeed is a survival strategy. If you have ever seen the British Parliament on television, you can perhaps get some idea, although the catcalls are absent.
Another lawyer rises, and argues for his client while the first continues. Three or four times the judge dismisses his remarks, and finally the hearing returns to some semblance of orderliness.
M.C. Mehta must play by those rules when he must. After all, if everyone else is speaking, and he says nothing, things may go very badly indeed. But at least in several cases, and probably for his appearances in general, Mehta is, in a sense, "in charge" now. He stands up and waits to be invited to speak. He sits back and lets the other side have its complete say. He knows that he will be given an opportunity to explain his point of view completely, because he has gained an enormous credibility over the years in the Supreme Court of India. (Indeed, the Court has on several occasions simply awarded him cash money in recognition of the services he is providing to the public, so that he may continue his work.)
DELHI RIDGE
The first case I observed involved a hearing on the failure of the City of Delhi government to take actions against illegal building in urban forests (green belt) and the consequent destruction.
After some arguments had been made regarding the illegal construction, the judge (Justice Singh) spoke up. "I think this is a crucial situation." He looked at the Delhi government lawyer: "You tell us what you have done about this." The lawyer stammered some sort of reply. The judge then turned to Mehta.
"Mr. Mehta, what can we do?" he asked.
Another lawyer jumped up and tried to intervene. The judge quickly silenced him.
"Your lordship, it is part of the ecosystem," Mehta answered. Then he went on and argued that the city government simply was failing even to monitor the developments, and had not committed staff to doing so.
"Your first point is there should be a Forest Department," Justice Singh summarized. "What is your second point?" Mehta answered and gave further analysis. He pointed out that a committee had reported on the destruction and made recommendations for controlling the activities.
"We will pass an order today, saying this is the report of the committee; what have they done?" He started speaking slowly, as a clerk wrote down the order.
"There is no indication about implementation of various measures to protect Delhi Ridge. We direct the Delhi Administration to file an indication three weeks from today as to what steps have been taken to implement these recommendations."
DELHI WATER POLLUTION
The municipal water pollution in Delhi came up after the Delhi Ridge order was issued.
The judge simply turned to Mehta, said, "What next?" and Mehta said that the municipal pollution was now on the agenda.
As Mehta detailed the lack of adequate action, Judge Singh turned to a government lawyer from one of the states through which the Ganges flows: "There was a news item in the newspaper saying that some $2 million is coming to you. We want clean water. That is all we want. Despite this Court's best efforts, nothing has happened. Young people are affected. Life span is shorter in Delhi.
"What we do is this. We will ask a NEERI team to come and inspect your plant.
"We must work together. The money we will get from the Government of India. We will see that it will be done."
The Delhi government lawyer spoke up: "We have already assessed the situation. . . . The proposed capacity after sewage treatment, at the end of the Seventh Plan . . ."
The judge interrupted him: "Do we have any dates on the actions?"
Advocate: "Yes, m'lord."
Judge: "You have seen the extent of the pollution?"
Advocate: "Yes."
Judge: "I suggest a fresh look. We are not in any way adversary. We can work together. We compliment your staff."
Advocate: "We've already installed a pilot treatment plant."
Judge: "What are you doing?"
Advocate: "By the end of the 8th five-year plan, that is 1997..."
Judge: "That is a long way off."
Advocate: "3 years it takes to set up a plant. By theyear 2000 there should be this capacity. After making projections, we have made this plan: what will be the population, then, what will be the requirements."
The judge started reading a draft order to the clerk. "We would like to have the opinion of NEERI. File an affidavit within 3 weeks. What else, Mr. Mehta?"
TAJ MAHAL CASE
Next, Mehta turned to matters concerning the Taj. More will follow . . . .