What Lawyers must Learn from Scientists to protect and promote Constitutional Morality
What Lawyers must Learn from Scientists to protect and promote Constitutional Morality
Lawyers have always been considered or at least
expected to be people with notable communication skills, and the ability to simplify
complex and intricate legal concepts while making submissions in courts. The TV
shows and internet series have contributed to this image significantly. On the
other hand, scientists and engineers are often envisaged as book worms, nerds
and geeks. Computer scientists are depicted as people who are glued to their
powerful PCs and physicist to their white/blackboards. Again, television shows
have also played a role in this. Nonetheless, people at the top of both the legal
profession and scientific communities are highly intelligent and smart
individuals without a doubt.
Advocates argue matters which have great significance
in our daily lives. The judgements of the court decide our freedoms and govern
our lives. A person who commits a wrong cannot claim ignorance of the law. On
contrary, if a person who is not studying science can claim ignorance of
several scientific principles and facts without having to be criticized. A
person can spend his entire life, reasonably happily, without knowing what
gravity is or Newton’s laws of motion or the concept of friction. However, not
knowing basic laws will pose difficulty in a person’s life.
Due to the ubiquity of laws and the mammoth power of
the State to enforce these laws, lawyers become the gatekeepers of justice.
However, despite this lawyers are never admired by the public. Lawyers are called
liars and greedy. Lawyers are rarely role models of individuals who are not
from the legal community. On the other hand, names of scientists and engineers like Einstien,
Hawking or Carl Sagan, are well known across the world and disciplines. Whereas,
lawyers are never as popular as Carl Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson or Bill Nye
the science guy. Even though Carl Sagan and Tyson have not made discoveries
like Einstein or Hawking, in many places they are household names. They are
recognized as people who have brought science to houses of ordinary people.
They have simplified intricate scientific principles for children. Lakhs of
people have read ‘Brief History of Time’ by Stephen Hawking and many of them
might be people who do not have advanced knowledge of the subject matter. However,
I am sure that no one except journalists and lawyers/law students would have
read the right to privacy judgement which governs 1.3 billion lives or the seminal
works of legal jurists like Upendra Baxi.
Human beings are born curious but most die
indifferent. The scientists who are painted as nerds and geeks with scarce social
skills are the ones who have become role models of the public. Scientists are
communicating the significance of scientific discoveries. The speech of Carl
Sagan titled ‘A Pale Blue Dot’ is the epitome of this. His speech caught the curiosity
of millions of people to a photograph of Earth. He made the photograph of the
Earth about us- human beings.
One might say that there aren’t similar instances in the
legal domain which will draw the attention of thousands of people. I strongly
disagree with this. Legal history in India is filled with instances which, if
explained rightly, will give goosebumps to people. One such example is the
framing of our Constitution. The Constituent Assembly was framing the
Constitution when India was witnessing a civil war, one of the most horrendous
human exodus, scathing illiteracy, poverty, and caste discrimination among
other issues. Despite the extremely conservative society, the Assembly came up
with a liberal Constitution. While untouchability was prevalent widely
throughout the country, the Constitution abolished it. While the shadow of
lower castes could touch an upper caste, the Constitution entitled the lower
caste to stand in the same line as an upper caste while voting. When women were
confined to kitchens and men talked politics, Constitution recognised the equal
right of both men and women to elect their political representatives. The
Constitution literally made slaves and oppressed full citizens.
The making of our Constitution is a story to be told.
It is incumbent on legal professionals to inspire people with such stories.
However, lawyers often refrain from engaging with the populi. Lawyers should use
their communication skills to become ambassadors of law to the people.
This reminds me of a quote from Dr B R Ambedkar-
“Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment.
It has to be cultivated. We must realize that our people have yet to learn it.”
As scientists have a moral duty to promote scientific
temper, lawyers have to cultivate constitutional morality among people;
especially in times when constitutional morality is confused with the constitution.
And when everything begins and ends with the constitutional provisions without
due regard to constitutional morality.
Comments
Post a Comment