CPIL replies to CJI Thakur’s queries on “PIL filing mechanism”; Fali Nariman resigns

Centre for Public Interest Litigation or CPIL as it is popularly known, has made detailed written submissions to the Supreme Court in response to the queries raised by Chief Justice of India TS Thakur regarding the mechanism employed by CPIL while deciding whether to agitate a particular matter in court or not..This has come after Chief Justice TS Thakur had posed a slew of questions regarding the mechanism employed by CPIL for filing PILs..While media reports indicated that the petitions filed by CPIL are vetted by Senior Advocates including Anil Diwan, Shanti Bhushan and Fali Nariman, Nariman had, subsequently, clarified that he does not scrutinize any of the petitions filed by CPIL. Advocate Prashant Bhushan had, then clarified that he had only stated that Nariman was part of the Governing Council of CPIL and was not involved in scrutinizing the petitions filed by CPIL..CPIL has now stated in its written submissions that Fali Nariman has resigned from CPIL following the confusion created due to wrong reporting by the media..CPIL’s written submissions begin by describing about its credentials and reputation and its contribution to PIL jurisprudence..“The great renown and reputation enjoyed by the Indian Judiciary owes immensely to the development and expansion of public interest jurisdiction by the past visionary judges of the Supreme Court. This development and expansion owes a great debt to the Indian media which has championed the cause of underprivileged, and has exposed mis-governance and corruption. CPIL has been in the forefront of this movement. In recent years, it has secured from this Hon’ble Court many a landmark decision, e.g. the delineation of the concept of institutional integrity in the CVC case, and the development of a framework for allocation of national resources in accordance with the Constitutional principles of trusteeship and equity in the 2G scam case. These decisions have strengthened the institutions of governance and greatly advanced the cause of probity in public life.”.It then hits out at certain sections of the media, particularly media entities like Firstpost.com owned by Reliance Group, for carrying allegedly inaccurate and biased reports about the proceedings in court..CPIL has then set out the procedure followed by it while agitating matters in court..“Shri Prashant Bhushan with the assistance of his juniors and after discussions with Ms. Kamini Jaiswal looks into and scrutinizes carefully the materials on which a potential PIL is to be drafted. If the material comes from a doubtful source, it is examined with suspicion and utmost care. On the basis of the quality of the material, e.g. CAG reports, documents obtained under RTI, or supplied by whistleblowers, journalists or others, a considered decision is taken to go ahead or not with the petition. The majority of the litigation proposals coming to CPIL are rejected, since it is felt that the material is doubtful, or the matter does not raise a major issue of public importance. In fact, Shri Prashant Bhushan and at least three of his juniors are spending the bulk of their time in scrutinizing PIL proposals and the material which comes with them. Thereafter, the members of the sub-committee which decides whether to file the PIL or not, are consulted personally or on telephone/email and accordingly the proposed PIL is either filed or dropped. This practice has been approved and ratified by the Resolution dated 04.01.2013which has been filed in this Hon’ble Court through affidavit dated 09.01.2013 in WPC 505/2012, titled as CPIL v. UOI and Ors. (re. RAW, IB matter).”.CPIL has clarified that it has two bodies – the Governing Council which included Senior Advocate Fali Nariman (before his resignation) and the Sub-Committee which has 5 persons – Anil Divan (President of CPIL), Shanti Bhushan, Colin Gonsalves, Kamini Jaiswal (General Secretary of CPIL) and Prashant Bhushan. It has stated that the Sub-committee members are only consulted while filing a particular PIL and not founding members like Fali Nariman..It has also stated that the affidavits in support are mainly filed by its General Secretary and it adheres to and “stands by the practice of filing properly documented petitions supported by the affidavit of the Secretary in accordance with the settled practice ratified by the Resolution dated 04.01.2013.”.It has also made it clear that it does not completely reject a PIL on the ground that information has been given by political rivals or interested individuals..“It needs to be pointed out that it is settled law that it is not as if petitions filed by political rivals or interested individuals would be automatically rejected, but it is the quality of the material, evidence and nature of the controversy which triggers and invites the interest of the court in entertaining a PIL..The offices of Shri Prashant Bhushan and Ms. Kamini Jaiswal generally view documents coming from non-independent sources with great care, but, if the information appears credible and shows evidence of serious harm to public interest which needs intervention by the Court, then the same is appropriately used in the PIL. This is done after a dispassionate and objective analysis about its credibility…..CPIL was formed precisely for the purpose of taking up PILs in an organized manner purely in public interest. Over the years, CPIL has established its credentials as a genuine public interest organization by dint of an array of PILs filed before this Hon’ble Court and before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.”.CPIL has further stated that it has not solicited donations and the lawyers who pursue cases for CPIL, do it pro bono..“Out of pocket expenses, like court fees, photocopying and typing charges, are defrayed from the contributions made by the members. The junior advocates who assist in filing PILs work in the chambers of Shri Prashant Bhushan or Ms. Kamini Jaiswal and are remunerated by them personally. They are not paid out of CPIL’s funds.”.It has concluded its submissions by giving details of the major cases agitated by it.