“If I wanted a sinecure for my judgments, why would I ask for just a Rajya Sabha seat?”

Former Chief Justice of India, RANJAN GOGOI, stirred controversy when—nominated by the President of India—he took oath as a Rajya Sabha MP on March 19, just four months after he had demitted office as the head of the Supreme Court of India. Opposition leaders and several jurists cried foul, charging that his nomination was effectively a quid pro quo from the Modi government, a reward for several verdicts during his tenure that allegedly favoured the government. In the first-ever interview of his career, Gogoi spoke exclusively to INDIA TODAY Group Editorial Director Raj Chengappa and Senior Editor Kaushik Deka. Excerpts:

- Raj Chengappa and Senior Editor Kaushik Deka

Why did you accept the Rajya Sabha nomination so soon after demitting the office of the Chief Justice of India? Shouldn’t there have been a cooling-off period?

A. Why should I not have accepted it? When the president of the country makes an offer under Article 80, you don’t refuse it. When the nation wants your services, should you refuse that? As far as a cooling-off period is concerned, tell me, under what law or rule can the cooling-off period be visualised? If [it] is required, please make a law for [it]. Also, if a cooling-off period is applied, how do you [then] man the tribunals that have to be headed by retired Supreme Court judges? It is for the executive or the policymakers to prescribe a norm for cooling-off.

Q. In March 2019, you had said that post-retirement appointments are a blot on the independence of the judiciary. What changed?

A. Do you think a Rajya Sabha seat is a job? My statement was in the context of a judgment which dealt with tribunalisation. It’s not a job. It’s a recognition and an expectation that you will contribute in your field of expertise.

Q. When you were being sworn in, opposition parties walked off, crying ‘Shame!’. How do you react to that?

A. No reaction. It was expected. Opposition parties walk in and walk out. I don’t see how that can disturb any reasonable person.

Q. It’s not just opposition parties. Several former judges have suggested that your nomination was a sinecure for those verdicts during your tenure that favoured the Modi government—such as in the Ram Janmabhoomi case and the Rafale deal.