The Hindu : Opinion / Letters to the Editor : Partial view

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Mar 03, 2009
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Opinion

Opinion - Letters to the Editor

Partial view

The editorial “Partial view of events” (Feb. 28) is balanced and not one-sided as alleged by some lawyers. No doubt the police action in the Madras High Court on February 19 resulted in serious damage and the guilty should be brought to book. But it is a fact that lawyers attended courts for only nine days since the beginning of 2009, the reasons for which are well known. From whatever has been published about the events leading up to the High Court incident, and the remarks by the judiciary and the Bar Council of India that followed, it appears that the laws are being virtually rewritten for the lawyers.

A situation may arise when there is a fracas among advocates, litigants or between advocates and litigants on court premises and the police may wait for written permission to control the violence.

D.M. Mohunta,

Chennai

The continuing agitation by lawyers is not only unfortunate but also unjustifiable. As important as the question who gave orders to the police to enter the court premises is why the lawyers brought rotten eggs into the court room which they threw at Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy.

By prolonging the agitation and refusing to pay heed to the advice of the Supreme Court, the lawyers give the impression that their motive is not just action against the police officials concerned for the February 19 incident.

K. Dhandapani,

Cuddalore

The boycott of courts by lawyers should have ended after Justice Srikrishna started the probe and inspected the damage in the High Court. Further agitations by lawyers will cause untold difficulties to the clients.

C. Lakshmi Narain,

Chennai

While it is true that the police action was high-handed, the Supreme Court’s response has been astonishing. While it ‘ordered’ an inquiry into the police action, it only ‘advised’ the lawyers to return to work.

M. Fayyaz Rafeeque,

Chennai

While questions are being asked about who ordered the lathicharge in the Madras High Court, no one seems to be asking from where the stones with which the lawyers pelted the police came from. The argument seems to be that under provocation, as in the High Court, all that the police should do is protect themselves with armours.

Usha Krshna,

Chennai

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

End to an unedifying chapter

Why U.S. policy risks repeating history

Time for new coalition for Obama

The Gaza earthquake and its aftershocks

Corrections and Clarifications