A group of advocates from the Madras High Court (HC) Bar Council has sent a representation to the President, as well as to the Supreme Court (SC) Collegium, voicing out concerns against the recommendation to elevate advocate Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri as one of the judges of the HC. The SC collegium, on January 17 this year, recommended the elevation of five advocates as judges of the Madras HC, namely Venkatachari Lakshminarayanan, Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri, Pillaipakkam Bahukutumbi Balaji, Ramaswamy Neelakandan, and Kandhasami Kulandaivelu Ramakrishnan.
Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri is a lawyer, hailing from Nagercoil in Tamil Nadu, and is one of the 17 advocates and three judicial officers, who were recommended for appointment as judges by the collegium headed by the Chief Justice of India, Justice DY Chandrachud.
Members of the Bar, in their representation dated Wednesday, February 1, 2023, said that the recommendation to elevate advocate Gowri “dents the independence of the judiciary”, and substantiated their statement with two interviews given by Gowri.
Citing one of the videos titled ‘More Threat to National Security and Peace? Jihad or Christian Missionary? - Answers Victoria Gowri’, the bar members said that in the video, Gowri “launches a shocking, distasteful diatribe against Christians”. In the video, she is seen saying, “At the world level, they find the Islamic group as more dangerous than Christian groups. But as far as India is concerned, I would like to say that Christian groups are more dangerous than Islamic groups. Both are equally dangerous in the context of conversion, especially love jihad. I don’t mind a Hindu marrying a Muslim - a Hindu girl marrying a Muslim boy, unless and until they are in love with each other and they are living in understanding and love. But if I am not able to find my girl with him as his wife, instead, if I find my girl in Syrian terrorist camps, I have an objection, and that is what I define as love jihad. (sic)”
She also goes on to explain a personal experience where her family member was converted to Christianity. To a question about which is more dangerous for national security, where the questioner claims that there are bombings from “jihadi groups but not church groups”, she is seen saying, “Bombing is less dangerous compared to the kind of conversions being done by the aggressive Christian theologist groups.(sic)”
The protesting advocates also cited another video titled ‘Cultural genocide by Christian Missionaries in Bharat - Victoria Gowri’, where she is seen saying that Bharathanatyam should not be performed to Christian songs and that the dance form and Carnatic music were “tampered with” and “awkwardly taken” by Christians. Saying that the tune of a song about a goddess was used for a kuthu (peppy, fast numbers are referred to as kuthu songs in Tamil) song, Gowri claimed that it was a “conspiracy hatched by the leftists and the DK [Dravidar Kazhagam] supporters in Tamil Nadu”.
To a question about Bharathiya cultural elements being hijacked by Christian missionaries and evangelist groups, she says in the video, “This is the most nefarious activity of the Roman Catholic sect of Christianity,” and adds that Public Interest Litigations (PILs) should be filed against the organisations to stall the “nefarious activities”. Citing these two videos, the advocates have said that her statements amount to “hate speech” and are likely to spread and incite communal discord/violence. They also mentioned an article that was published in Organiser (a publication of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)) where she had written about religious conversions.
In their representation, the advocates have stated that the collegium’s recommendation of “a person who harbours such strong antipathy towards minorities is disturbing”. Further, stating that an impartial and independent judiciary is an essential aspect (sine qua non) of a democracy, they questioned if a litigant belonging to a Muslim or Christian community would get justice in her court. They have also reiterated the stand of the United Nations and the judgments of the SC with respect to hate speeches. “A judge is a custodian of Constitutional rights and cannot be its saboteur. We are therefore compelled to state that appointing a person who spews vitriol and animosity towards an entire community as a judge of a High Court will cause grave harm to the judiciary,” they said, mentioning that Gowri was the National General Secretary of the Mahila Morcha of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). While Victoria Gowri is listed as one of the National Secretaries of Mahila Morcha, in a BJP press release dated 2010, the Twitter ID annexed to their representation - that mentions her post - does not exist now.
Further, stating that it was critical to safeguard the judiciary from being weakened by its own administrative action, the aggrieved advocates have sought to recall the recommendation of the collegium to appoint Gowri as a judge of Madras HC. A Collegium is a system under which appointments and transfers of judges to the higher judiciary are made. The Collegium consists of senior-most judges, including the Chief Justice of India.
This was first reported by Sourav Das and his article can be read here.