My esteemed colleagues Me Lord Mr. Justice U. C. Bannerjee ,Justice Nasim Hasan Shah, Hon’ble judges from courts of India and abroad , all ,legal luminaries and most eminent personalities gracing this conference today ,we the judges of Supreme court and the High Court had our ego killed today that we have the prerogative to issue the writ of mandamus which would be obeyed by anyone in India. This morning we found that the children of this country have a greater power to issue mandamus. They issued a writ to the older section of the people "enough is enough; you are making a world for our living. We have now realized what is the world you making for us -stop we have a suggestion for you, make a parliament the decision of which will be binding on you all and that would be a better solution to stop what is happening today." The message was clear and had the sharpness of a razor.

Lord Hailsham (Lord Chancellor of England) said thus:

"So long as a Judge keeps silent his reputation for wisdom and impartiality remains unsullied but every utterance he makes public, except in his judicial performance, brings him within the focus of criticism."

I am now compelled to put myself into that focus by agreeing to speak on a subject which has no possibility of reaching within the ken of my judicial performance.

The subject of this conference is ‘To Foster respect for International Law as envisaged in Article 51 of the Constitution of India’. Advantage of this subject is that this part is included in part IV of the Constitution and no one used to read that part IV . Utility of that subject is that nobody has used that part IV and I have no reason to think that in future also the clauses of that part IV would be utilized. That part particularly Article 51 and more particularly the clause (c) of that article has now been plucked out and sought to be given emphasis. That article is designed to remind all wings of state that every endeavour should be made to promote international peace and harmony.

Even if the subject was titled ‘World Peace’, it would not have made any qualitative difference. The propounders thought of christening the title of the subject by tagging it with an Article plucked out from this part IV. When the matter was introduced in the Constituent Assembly Mr. Mahabir Tyagi, a stormy petrel, said in his speech like this:

"Our aim should be, to become a first-class power, a strong power, so that our voice, our pleadings, and our arguments may have some weight and people may know that they should not annoy this great country and that it would mean a war. So, Sir, I want to reserve, one privilege as a man of war, that in case we fail to achieve these objects peacefully, we shall go for war and accomplish these objects. With these words of reservation, I support whatever you have because it is all a pious wish".

Even now there is a section of people who believe World Peace is only a pious wish. Many a time serious discussions were made but World Peace is drifting like a mirage. I well remember that in 1976 November, a conference was held in Texas. Delegates from different parts of the globe attended the conference. The venue was a fascinatingly beautiful campsite at a place called Pallacious, which was situated about 200 Kilometers from Houston. The subject of the conference was World Peace. After discussing the subject for five days, the conference ended as usual, by achieving many things except World Peace. A number of resolutions were passed by the delegates. Now a quarter of a century has passed but World Peace remains at bay.

I am reminded of a beautiful film, which I saw during my student days. The title of that film was "Roman Holiday". A young princess belonging to a European country made a visit to Rome. The role of that princess was acted beautifully by the one time elfin of the Hollywood Audrey Hepburn. Though that film was her debut, her performance therein shot her to such a height that she was counted as the world’s costliest film star. In "Roman Holiday" the princess escaped from the palace and was gamboling through the streets of a Rome with a commoner. Finally she had to return to the palace. There was a last scene in which the young princess was addressing a press conference. One correspondent asked her "Your Majesty, what is your suggestion for achieving World Peace?". Her answer was flashed by the newspapers with banner headlines. This was that answer, "If you can maintain good and honourable relations between nations there would be World Peace."

When I read the Constituent Assembly Debate by which Article 51 of the Constitution was finally shaped as it is, I found that some very high profile members participated in the discussion on the subject. Prof K.T. Shah, in his speech pointed out how Mahatma Gandhi addressed the Round Table Conference held in London. He said, if all countries in the world could disband their armies that might be the first step towards abjuring violence. Prof. Shah himself said that the suggestion of Mahatma Gandhi was intended as a pre-independence exhortation, for abjuring violence. It was M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar (who was the speaker of the second Lok Sabha) who mooted the idea that all international disputes should be settled through arbitration. By international disputes, it means disputes as between two nations or more.

Let us look at the international disputes from other angle. Could any dispute between two nations be solved by force or violence? History proves that it did not in 90% cases. But the force and violence used in all cases of international disputes resulted in killing of countless human beings, incalculable injuries to many other human beings who survived death. Among them so many remained for the rest of their lives as physically incapacitated. We have seen natural calamities as well as manmade calamities. Most of the natural calamities are unpreventable. Though by adopting timely precautionary measures the consequences of such natural calamities could be minimized. But all manmade calamities are preventable. Once it is not prevented the consequences ensuing from it are very disastrous. Second World War is perhaps the worst example. Even today its consequences are haunting human life.

It is in this context that we have to read the third clause of Article 51. It is an exhortation to the instrumentalities of India that they shall endeavour to foster respect for International Law and Treaty obligations. In the original draft of the Article the word used was "to sustain" instead "to foster". Dr. P. Subharayan (father of Mr. Mohan Kumaramangalam and Grandfather of Mr.P.R. Kumaramangalam the late cabinet minister ) moved for amendment of the word "sustain". When some other members asked him whether there was any difference between the two, Dr. Subharayan then expressed his view that the word ‘sustain’ could have an element of force. He felt that the word ‘foster’ will be bereft of that element. The Constituent Assembly accepted the said amendment. I pointed out the above only for conveying that the Constitution makers were very sensitive in avoiding even a possible interpretation of the Constitution for justifying violence. The need for formulating International Law is to cover international disputes. If there are such laws which could bind the nations involved in disputes, all that is needed is a machinery for adjudicating on the basis of such laws. All the nations, can then be made to abide by the decisions.

International disputes usually occur on account of three causes:

(i) Disputes between nations regarding the respective boundaries.
(ii) Claiming title over territories beyond such boundaries.
(iii) Greed for gaining supremacy over peoples of other nations.

We all know that the Second World War was actually fought on account of the craving of Adolf Hitler to have such supremacy over the entire Europe. No one can think of solving disputes created by such tyrants through arbitration. But the disputes arising on account of the first two causes can certainly be settled through arbitration.

If boundary disputes arise between two individuals, we have the mechanism for resolving it through judicial adjudication. In exceptional cases, such disputes could be resolved through arbitration. Imagine, a situation when both such redressal forums are not available. Then most of the boundary dispute, between private individual would erupt into fights and ending up in serious injuries inflicted on the members of the family of both sides including death.

International disputes are in a way the expansions of individual disputes on claims over lands. We have only two options for settling such claims. One is through arbitration and the other is through force.

If we have to resort to force, we repeat what primitive people were doing. All the improvement of our civilisation did not help us in finding out a mechanism for solving such disputes otherwise than through war. History also proves that force cannot solve disputes between nations.

Among all the creatures, man alone entertains a greed for land or another man’s property. No animal has exhibited such greed. For the animals, the greed is only for food. For man, greed for food forms a very small percentage of greed. That is why man is considered to be the most dangerous of all creatures.

In the zoo of Luzaka there is a famous item. In front of a cell, it is written like this: ‘See the most dreaded animal in the world.’ When you get inside the cell there is only a huge mirror. Look into it and you will find the most dreaded animal in the world.!

The Babylonian legend is probably the most primordial of all the legends of the creation -story it gave a message. God created man in his own image and he breathed into his nostrils that had been adopted by many Semitic religions later. ‘God created man in his own image’. Image is not the shape image is the characteristic. He breathed into his nostrils. Evidently he was not injecting Oxygen into it because all other creatures also required oxygen.

Man is supposed to be the representative of God on earth . When he breathed into his nostrils God inducted himself into man ."You go around you not only exhibit my characteristic but contain myself". With the pressing of a button today the whole world can be shattered . Restructuring can be done only when you realize how and what was originally intended by the creator.

The great sages of India had said during the early days: "Lokesamasta Sukhino Bhawanthu". This is a Sookhtha emanated from the hermitages of India. It is a heritage of our civilization. The philosophy embedded in Article 51 is truly the reflection of the Indian hermitage. Let prosperity and well being come to the people of the world as a whole.

Back