The many people telephoning or trooping in to meet Justice Nitte Santosh Hegde after he put in his papers as Karnataka’s Lokayukta, on June 23, are either trying to persuade him to stay back and fight the system or are congratulating him for effortlessly giving up the much-coveted chair, which affords him moral authority even over a chief minister. Among those who have urged him to continue are Union home minister P. Chidambaram and Opposition leaders in the state. Among those who have congratulated him are two former chief justices of India and an octogenarian Gandhian. Justice Hegde appears more inclined to accept the congratulations than to heed advice on reversing his decision. He does not sound stubborn, but understands the importance of stepping down. And to anxious questions about who might replace him, he has a ready line from history: “People asked, ‘After Nehru, who?’ But we got a very competent man after him.”
Justice Hegde chuckles when it is suggested that he is perhaps now the most famous Bunt (a prosperous land-owning community of coastal Karnataka) after Aishwarya Rai and Shilpa Shetty. “Why after them?” he retorts playfully. He is aware, of course, of the hype surrounding him; also his phenomenal success and now the aura of a martyr that has brought him stardom.
But people who want Hegde to stay on—essentially because he is competent and his personal integrity is beyond doubt—find it difficult to understand his paradoxical stance against politics. “How do we save democracy if we fuel such an anti-politics imagination?” asks one of his senior colleagues. “What is the alternative ideal we should chase? Why is he creating a cynical, non-participatory ethos among the people? Why is he fuelling public euphoria with a new upgrade to his martyrdom?” They are surprised, and say he is erring in putting his private convictions over public exigencies. But this is what Justice Hegde says: “I have seen politics from close quarters. I have no faith in it. It is a dirty game. I have no hesitation in saying that. I don’t think anybody can be useful there by being honest.”
Well-connected Sushma Swaraj with the Reddy brothers
Hegde’s predecessor, Justice Venkatachala, joined the BJP after he demitted office, but Justice Hegde is clear that isn’t the route he will take. “My no to politics is firm. This is not something I’m telling you today. I said this even when a former chief minister, whom I indicted in my mining report, alleged that I had an understanding with Yediyurappa. I had said then that if I contest an election, don’t give me a vote, give me a slap. I stand by it.” This prompts another colleague of his to say that he is occupying a “nebulous middle” after segregating the public and the state.
People who have known Hegde’s father—Justice Kawadoor Sadananda Hegde—are surprised by his revulsion for politics. After quitting the Supreme Court in 1973 to protest the supersession by a junior judge (Justice A.N. Ray) for the post of chief justice, the senior Hegde had joined the Jayaprakash Narayan movement during the Emergency. Later, he contested on a Janata Party ticket from the Bangalore South constituency against Congressman and former chief minister Kengal Hanumanthaiah and was elected to the sixth Lok Sabha, in which he also held the Speaker’s post. After stepping down, he even became the national vice-president of the BJP. Prior to this, he was a member of the upper house of Parliament in the ’50s. “My father was a Congressman until certain developments happened in that party. He always wore khadi and he was opposed to the communal politics of the Jan Sangh,” insists Justice Hegde.
Earlier, Justice Hegde himself has been close to non-Congress governments in the state and Centre. When Ramakrishna Hegde (not related) was chief minister, he was an advocate-general, a post he quit when Hegde resigned and S.R. Bommai took over. He was additional solicitor-general of India between 1989 and 1990, when V.P. Singh was prime minister, and then became solicitor-general between 1998 and 1999, when Vajpayee was prime minister, before being appointed to the Supreme Court. In 2006, the H.D. Kumaraswamy-led coalition government made him Lokayukta. “After my father quit the SC, he could not work in any court, but he advised me to file applications for the detenus held in the Bangalore Central Jail during the Emergency. Through me, he came in contact with L.K. Advani, Vajpayee, S.N. Misra and other leaders,” he says.
For those floating a conspiracy theory about Justice Hegde timing his resignation to embarrass the Yediyurappa government, these facts may come as a surprise. People who have known Justice Hegde for a long time confirm that he is not given to strategy. “His core is sentimental. There is a childlike innocence in him,” they say. Justice Hegde somewhat adds to this perception when he says: “I have asked for my resignation to take effect two months later only to prevent a statutory deadlock; there is no other hidden motive.”
Justice Hegde has led a good life. “My wife and I have no children, but we have a close-knit family and a small circle of friends. We have travelled three-fourths of the globe together. When my practice was good, I used to travel first class. I have travelled on the Concorde some three or four times. I have stayed in the best of hotels. Between 1977 and 2006, until I became Lokayukta, I went to the US once a year. I went so frequently because I have a paraplegic brother-in-law there who lost the power of his limbs in an operation. I had promised my sister I will visit them every year. As soon as I retire, I owe her a visit.” And, of course, he promises to remain a “freelance speaker” against corruption.
Union law minister Veerappa Moily has said that the Centre will give statutory status and more powers to the Lokayukta (How Many Seas..., Jul 12). It is most welcome. But why doesn’t he talk of providing full powers to the CBI, another type of Lokayukta? B.V. Rao, Bangalore
“After Advani, who?” Perhaps we have the answer in Santosh Hegde! Siddharth Mani, Delhi
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT