Mr. Kapil Sibal: Defending the Indefensible?
Mr. Kapil Sibal: Defending the Indefensible?
Mr. Kapil Sibal: Defending the Indefensible?
Posted on 28th September, 2024 (GMT 19:20 hrs)
ABSTRACT
The article criticizes Kapil Sibal for defending controversial figures like Ajay Piramal in the DHFL scam and the West Bengal government in the R.G. Kar case. It questions Sibal’s ethical stance, given his multiple roles as a politician and lawyer, highlighting contradictions in his actions, which seem to favor the powerful over justice. The piece laments the perceived shift from his earlier values to opportunism, leaving DHFL victims and others disillusioned by his alignment with the rich and politically connected.
Dear Mr. Kapil Sibal,
We, as long-time admirers and appreciators of your multitasking work, stand today at a peculiar juncture of disturbing reflection and doubt. We had previously written to you regarding our concerns and sufferings⤡, but you turned a blind’s eye to our state of financial abuse⤡ ⤡, which is truly unbecoming of someone as esteemed as you from our gaze. We wish to understand what caused the same kind of shift in you. We cannot handle this state of dilemma and disillusionment that we are currently facing. We are not unfamiliar with the ideological bankruptcies of Indian political parties, but we have never seen you foregoing your individual commitments and private ethics.
As a public figure, it is surprising to witness your dual roles in recent controversial cases, notably your defence of both the West Bengal Government in the R.G. Kar case and Mr. Ajay Piramal in the DHFL scam.
Given your multiple roles as a Rajya Sabha member, member of Samajwadi Party, lawyer, and YouTuber, a pertinent question arises: How do you reconcile these conflicting responsibilities, agencies and affiliations?
Let us not ever forget that Mr. Ajay Piramal⤡, whom you represent, is a close crony of your political adversary, the BJP. This glaring contradiction is puzzling, especially since your defence of such individuals seems to directly clash with the ethical principles one would expect from someone in your political position that goes against the crony Saffron fascistic oligarchy in India.
Defending the WB Government: A Questionable Stance
In the R.G. Kar case, your defence of the West Bengal Government (which is being publicly criticized for its failures in health management and women’s security in the workplace) by wasting tax-payers’ money raises eyebrows. How does this align with the Samajwadi Party’s ethos of representing the underprivileged and opposing establishment-driven policies, fueled by patriarchal mindsets? In such a highly visible and controversial case, your involvement seems less about justice and more about possible opportunism. We are not comfortable enough to witness how you, a senior advocate, are being continuously humiliated by Indira Jaising et al., in the case of the heinous R.G. Kar Rape-and-Murder. We are awestruck to view that you are appealing to the CJI-headed bench for stopping the live streaming of the court trials in this case. You are following Ms. Banerjee’s path when she also declined the WBJDF’s plea for live streaming their first meeting in connection with this very case.
The DHFL Scam: A Crisis of Ethics
Then there is the DHFL scam⤡⤡. Mr. Ajay Piramal, a business magnate with alleged insider trading activities, environmental extortionist practices⤡, and alleged adverse possession of DHFL’s assets, stands accused in one of the largest financial frauds in Indian history, viz., the DHFL Scam that led to huge unjustified haircuts for common people, the small investors along with UPPCL and Air Force. Mr. Piramal possibly involved himself in two occasions of contempt of court within the DHFL case, once in the case of two verdicts of the Hon’ble NCLT (19th May, 2021) and Hon’ble NCLAT (27th January, 2022). Like Bajrangbali, Mr. Piramal took these two giant leaps. He has previously been detected to have close ties with the BJP in the Flashnet Scam⤡ ⤡ ⤡ (with Union Minister Piyush Goyal) and in donating a huge sum of 85 crores to the BJP through electoral bonds⤡ (a case, obviously thanks to you and Prashant Bhushan, led to a path-breaking judgement on the part of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India). Moreover, he is also the secondary kin of BJP’s favoured business tycoon, Mr. Ambani. The fact that you are defending him despite his express ties to the BJP casts further doubt on your erstwhile commitment (?) to distributive justice for the people. Are you not, by extension, protecting the interests of a superrich MAN closely linked to the very political party you stand in opposition to? Where does your loyalty lie—towards public service or personal wealth?
Furthermore, you had previously defended Mr. Kapil Wadhawan, DHFL’s ex-promoter, who stands in antagonism to Mr. Piramal, the claimed “owner” of DHFL. It cannot be forgotten that Mr. Wadhawan wanted to fully repay all the creditors of the DHFL, a plea that was ignored by the RBI-appointed CoC and Mr. Piramal. This raises further questions.
SIBAL DEFENDING WADHAWANDownload
The Ethical Divide: Political vs. (?) Legal
This brings us to the larger question: How do you differentiate your political identity from your legal profession? Many in India turn to lawyers for support, yet your recent actions seem to blur the lines between upholding justice and securing lucrative “high-profile” cases. This is a dangerous precedent in a fragile democracy that stands in dire need for ethical leadership at the present hour of undeclared emergency. In the case of declared emergency, one knows the given set of “Dos and Don’ts”, but here, within the de facto emergency, there are no such prescriptions and proscriptions.
As expressed by Flaubert in his Dictionary of Accepted Ideas⤡, the role of lawyers often goes beyond mere representation:
“LAWYERS. Too many in Parliament. Their judgment is warped. Of a lawyer who is a poor speaker, say: ‘Yes, but he knows his books.'”
This quote aptly reflects the growing scepticism surrounding your recent actions. Similarly, Hind Swaraj (1909) highlights the exploitative nature of the legal profession, as written by a briefless barrister from London and South Africa:
“The lawyers, therefore, will, as a rule, advance quarrels instead of repressing them. Moreover, men take up that profession, not in order to help others out of their miseries, but to enrich themselves. It is one of the avenues of becoming wealthy… They are glad when men have disputes. Petty pleaders actually manufacture them. Their touts, like so many leeches, suck the blood of the poor people.” ⤡
These words seem eerily relevant to your recent involvements. Are you siding with power and wealth over rightfulness and justice? Is the pursuit of “professionalism” merely figuring as an excuse for enriching yourself at the expense of the oppressed, poor and marginalized? We cannot accept this fact, since, as we said earlier, we have always stood by your genuine and sincere efforts towards securing the constitutional ideals of the great Indian democracy. We have also seen Com. Bikash Bhattacharya to be fighting a case in favour of Mukul Roy (dubious political party identity)’s son. We were equally surprised back then as well.
A Fan’s Disillusionment Revisited
Mr. Sibal, we were once supporters, appreciating your decision to join the Samajwadi Party, a party with roots in the socialist ethos. But your actions, particularly in defending the West Bengal Government and Ajay Piramal, seem to reflect a striking loss of political ethics and an embrace of crude money-mongering professionalism. We can talk about two terms in this context, viz., “Professional Revolutionary” as given by Lenin and “Professional Lawyer”, where the semantic connotation of the term “Professional” changes. Why cannot you keep up with your socialist morality, following the grand ideals of Lohia?
We really want to ask you again: How can you reconcile these fragmentation of identities: MP, member of the Samajwadi Party, lawyer, and YouTuber? Are your legal cases really about justice, or are they about maintaining avenues for wealth accumulation?
The contrast between your defence of the WB Government in the R.G. Kar case and your defence of Ajay Piramal in the DHFL cases (notably on opposite sides of the political spectrum) is too stark to ignore. While ordinary citizens struggle for justice, it appears the wealthy can easily escape trial with well-paid legal defence, while the poor are left with gallows.
Political Integrity or Legal Opportunism?
The contradictions in your legal advocacy suggest that political integrity appears to be no longer your primary concern—rather, it seems to be about the profits gained from “professional” engagements in the context of crony capitalism. This realization is disheartening to those of us who once believed you stood for something more than this.
It is high time you answer the critical question: Where is your ideological commitment in this web of political and legal ambiguities?
We are appealing to your kind conscience so far as your further activities are concerned that could potentially enrich the fundamental ethos of democracy instead of money-centric professionalism so that our progeny would not blame us for our double, triple or n number of conflicting standards.
Hoping for a better planet,
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.
Yours hypothetically,
A family of helpless DHFL Victims
Comments
Post a Comment