Published Sep 29, 2023 | 2:54 PM ⚊ Updated Sep 29, 2023 | 2:54 PM
Congress leader VD Satheesan. (VD Satheesan/ Facebook)
The Opposition Congress in Kerala on Friday, 29 September, urged Governor Arif Mohammad Khan not to appoint former Kerala High Court Chief Justice S Manikumar as the chairperson of the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC)
In a letter sent to Khan, Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Assembly VD Satheesan requested him to refrain from providing approval to a proposal in this regard by the Pinarayi Vijayan government.
The LoP, in the letter, pointed out that as a member of the selection committee of the SHRC, he expressed his strong dissent in appointing the retired chief justice as the chairperson.
Satheesan said that the position of chairperson of the SHRC requires the highest level of probity and must be free of any bias towards the government in power.
“However, some of Justice S Manikumar’s decisions as chief justice of the Kerala High Court have raised serious concerns about his ability to function impartially and fairly, as required by the Human Rights Commission,” Satheesan alleged.
According to the current procedure, the chairperson of the Human Rights Commission is chosen after consulting members of the Selection Committee, including the Leader of the Opposition, he said in the letter.
However, in stark contrast to existing norms, only the name of a former chief justice was proposed in the meeting, he said, adding that details of other eligible names in contention, as well as their eligibility, were not provided in advance.
“This decision to unilaterally impose one name is undemocratic and mysterious,” Satheesan further alleged.
The government had implicitly revealed its intention to appoint the retired chief justice to the post of SHRC chairperson through “unusual decisions” involving him long before the selection process began, the senior Congress leader added.
Earlier this year, on 19 April, the chief minister had courted controversy after hosting a farewell dinner for Manikumar, at the state’s expense, according to critics.
The event at the upmarket Leela Kovalam, a beachside resort, was a hush-hush affair — until it became public the next day.
The Kovalam party turned controversial after social worker Sabu Stephen petitioned the President and the Chief Justice of India, saying that hosting such a party was in blatant violation of judicial rules, precedence, and several Supreme Court directives.
Satheesan had at that time sought an explanation from the government over the “secret” party.
The Congress had viewed the party as a thanksgiving feast, alleging Justice Manikumar had never antagonised the government in corruption cases against it. Citing a few cases, former home minister Ramesh Chennithala and many Opposition leaders alleged the judge had always adjourned cases critical to the government.
Chennithala also predicted that Justice Manikumar would be appointed as the chairman of the SHRC.
Justice Manikumar retired on 24 April. Four months later, the government decided to appoint him as the SHRC head.
A three-member committee comprising the chief minister, Assembly Speaker AN Shamseer, and the Opposition leader Satheesan selected Justice Manikumar as the SHRC chairman. Satheesan, however, objected to the selection but was overruled by a majority of 2-1.
Earlier, responding to South First, Satheesan said the government ignored political propriety and arbitrarily decided on a retired judge of its choice with scant regard for basic human rights.
“No panel of candidates was placed before the selection committee to make an informed decision. The government presented a single name. The government’s action is anti-democratic, and arbitrary,” Satheesan alleged.
Chennithala said it would be anybody’s guess whether such a “partisan” retired chief justice would discharge his duty as SHRC chairman in a fair manner. He added that Justice Manikumar, till retirement, sat on all cases he had filed against the Vijayan government.
(With PTI inputs)
