Constitutional decisions of the apex court can have an impact on a nation’s development. Reasons for the decision reveal the thinking and approach of the judges, and in case of dissenting judgments, the areas of difference. Little is known about discussions between the judges which precede the delivery of judgment. There is a fascinating account by Justice Jaganmohan Reddy in his book, Judiciary I Served, about what transpired behind the scenes in the historic Supreme Court Judgment in Keshavanand Bharti. Generally our Supreme Court judges are reticent about internal discussions. When transparency and accountability are accepted as indispensable for good governance, judges should not always be reluctant to inform the people about the factors and forces which played a role in their judgments which are of national importance. Judges of the US Supreme Court are not unduly inhibited in this regard. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has recently published her memoirs. On March 4, 2004, the Library of Congress released 1,500 boxes of the papers of Justice Blackmun which include the correspondence Blackmun had with other Justices during his 24-year tenure. They offer insights into personal relationships between members of the Court. Blackmun was a key figure in some of the major controversies that continue to divide the court, including the lines of power between Congress and the States, death penalty procedures and abortion. Blackmun, a supporter of the death penalty, changed his position toward the end of his tenure. ‘‘I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death,’’ he wrote. Blackmun thought the court was becoming too conservative in the 1980s as President Reagan began to appoint Justices, starting with Sandra Day O’Connor. The reason why Blackmun arranged for public release of the papers was because he ‘‘believed that the court belonged to the people, and that his life’s work should be made available to the people’’. In brief, it is ultimately the right of the people to know. Our retired Supreme Court judges may take a cue from Justice Blackmun. Bidding farewell V M Tarkunde who departed from our midst last Monday after a full span of 94 years was one of the most brilliant judges of the Bombay High Court in the post-Chagla 1957 period. It was Tarkunde’s judgment that first established the fundamental right to a passport in order to enable a person to travel abroad. The Supreme Court subsequently endorsed his reasoning in Satwant Singh’s case in 1967 which was reaffirmed in Maneka Gandhi (1978). Tarkunde was not merely a clever lawyer or an outstanding judge. His most striking quality was unwavering commitment to civil liberties at all times without counting the cost. This made him an inspirational model. At a time when many leading lawyers felt uncomfortable appearing against the government, during the spurious Emergency of June 1975, he valiantly persuaded the Delhi High Court to quash the detention orders passed against Kuldip Nayar and the venerable Bhimsen Sachar under the dreaded MISA. My appearance with him was an exhilarating experience as it was when I shared the platform with him opposing the Emergency. Tarkunde was essentially a thinker influenced by M N Roy’s thoughts. He was the founding father of People’s Union for Civil Liberties, a reputed NGO. I met him at his home four months ago along with former Chief Justice Chandachud, his close friend. We exchanged pleasant reminiscences. Tarkunde has joined the ranks of the immortals. To me bhau was a friend, philosopher and guide. His passing away has left a void. Obsession with impotency Male impotency has become an obsession. Several remedies have been prescribed including consumption of the Rhino’s horn which has led to massive slaughter of poor Rhinos. Pharmaceutical firms have profitably exploited the male desire for renewed virility. Viagra hit the market and is said to have been taken by 20 million people worldwide. In the last quarter of 2003 its manufacturer, Pfizer, made US$ 235 million. Now a new drug, provisionally named PT-141, has emerged. It is a ‘‘lust drug’’ taken in the form of a nasal spray, and is said to have been successfully tested on 270 impotent men who have all since been able to vigorously resume their sex lives. These drugs can cause problems. In New Zealand Viagra has raised serious women’s issues. Several women complained that doctors were giving their husbands the drug without considering its effects on them. Men’s clinics use the drug as quick-fix for men instead of helping couples with other problems in their relationship. A 51-year-old woman told researchers that she sometimes felt pressure to have sex both at night and the next morning so that her husband could ‘‘get in two for the price of one’’ of the pills. That is the paisa vasool karo mentality for which Viagra cannot be blamed.
