​Inglorious retreat: on the Supreme Court and cow vigilantism

Context & The Gist

The Supreme Court’s recent decision to step back from actively monitoring the implementation of its 2018 guidelines on cow vigilantism has sparked concern. This comes in response to petitions seeking contempt proceedings against states for failing to prevent and punish mob violence linked to cow protection. The Court now favors addressing each instance of violence on its own merits, effectively relinquishing its oversight role. This retreat reflects a broader pattern of judicial hesitancy in confronting majoritarian politics and raises questions about the enforcement of fundamental rights and the rule of law.

Key Arguments & Nuances

• Judicial Diffidence: The Court acknowledges the “unmanageability” of overseeing the implementation of broad directions, suggesting a lack of confidence in the state machinery’s willingness to act.
• Shift in Approach: The move from proactive monitoring to a case-by-case approach implies a diminished role for the judiciary in safeguarding citizens against mob violence.
• Growing Vigilantism: The article highlights that cow vigilantism has intensified since 2018, with some states even legally empowering vigilante groups, directly contravening the Court’s earlier guidelines.
• Police Inaction/Complicity: A critical point is the alleged inaction or even support of the police and state governments towards cow vigilantes, undermining the rule of law.
• Erosion of State Duty: The Court’s initial 2018 judgment emphasized the state’s “sacrosanct duty” to protect citizens, a principle seemingly diluted by the recent decision.

UPSC Syllabus Relevance

• Polity: Role of the Judiciary, Judicial Activism, Fundamental Rights (Article 21 - Right to Life and Personal Liberty), Directive Principles of State Policy.
• Governance: Issues related to law and order, role of police, challenges to good governance, implementation of court directives.
• Social Issues: Communalism, mob violence, vigilantism, and their impact on social harmony.

Prelims Data Bank

• Article 21: Right to Life and Personal Liberty – fundamental right often invoked in cases of mob violence and vigilantism. This article guarantees individuals the right to live with dignity and protects them from arbitrary state action.
• UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act): Often used in cases related to alleged conspiracies and threats to national security, sometimes criticized for its broad scope and potential for misuse.
• 2018 Supreme Court Guidelines: Directed states to prevent and punish cow vigilantism, appoint nodal officers, and ensure swift action against perpetrators.
• Justice J.S. Verma Committee (2013): Recommended amendments to the criminal law to address sexual violence more effectively. (Relevant as a comparison to the Court's retreat from proactive intervention).

Mains Critical Analysis

The Supreme Court’s decision represents a significant setback for the rule of law and raises serious concerns about the protection of fundamental rights. The Court’s initial intervention in 2018 acknowledged the systemic failure of law enforcement in addressing cow vigilantism and the need for proactive measures. However, the current retreat suggests a lack of resolve in confronting the political realities that enable such violence.

Challenges

• Political Pressure: The Court’s decision may be influenced by political pressure and a reluctance to confront the government on a sensitive issue.
• Enforcement Gap: Even with clear guidelines, effective implementation relies on the willingness of state governments and police forces to act, which is often lacking.
• Majoritarian Impunity: The rise of cow vigilantism is linked to a broader climate of impunity for those acting in the name of protecting cows, fueled by political rhetoric and social polarization.
• Erosion of Judicial Authority: The retreat undermines the Court’s authority as a guardian of fundamental rights and its ability to hold the state accountable.

Opportunities

• Focus on Individual Cases: While the Court has relinquished its oversight role, it can still play a crucial role in adjudicating individual cases of mob violence and ensuring justice for victims.
• Strengthening Legal Framework: There is a need for a more robust legal framework to address mob violence, including specific laws that criminalize vigilantism and provide for swift prosecution of perpetrators.
• Promoting Awareness: Raising public awareness about the dangers of vigilantism and the importance of upholding the rule of law is essential.

Value Addition

• Akhlaq Case (2015): The lynching of Mohammad Akhlaq over suspicion of cow slaughter highlighted the growing problem of cow vigilantism and the vulnerability of marginalized communities.
• PUCL v. State of Maharashtra (1994): This case established the importance of judicial review of administrative action and the need for the state to protect fundamental rights.
• Justice Verma Committee Report (2013): Emphasized the need for a comprehensive and victim-centric approach to criminal justice, including stricter laws and better enforcement mechanisms.

Context & Linkages

This article, concerning the Akhlaq case, demonstrates the historical context of cow-related violence and the challenges in securing justice for victims. The recent Supreme Court retreat can be seen as a continuation of the difficulties in holding perpetrators accountable, even when there is clear evidence of wrongdoing. Both articles highlight the vulnerability of marginalized communities and the need for a strong legal framework to protect them.

The article on the "regime change bogey" illustrates a broader trend of suppressing dissent and criminalizing protest in India. This context is relevant to the current situation as cow vigilantism can be seen as a form of extrajudicial action aimed at enforcing a particular ideology and silencing opposition. The Court’s retreat may embolden those who seek to suppress dissent through violence and intimidation.

The Way Forward

• Strengthen Law Enforcement: Invest in training and resources for police forces to effectively prevent and investigate mob violence.
• Fast-Track Courts: Establish fast-track courts to expedite the prosecution of cases related to cow vigilantism and ensure swift justice for victims.
• Community Policing: Promote community policing initiatives to build trust between law enforcement and marginalized communities.
• Public Awareness Campaigns: Launch public awareness campaigns to promote tolerance, respect for diversity, and the rule of law.
• Legislative Action: Enact specific laws criminalizing vigilantism and providing for stringent penalties for perpetrators.