Set the scene
Sir — It is hard to think of a more emotionally charged venue than Hatchoza for Oppenheimer’s inaugural screening in Japan. The theatre is located less than a kilometre from the hypocentre of the atomic bombing in Hiroshima. The film premiered in Japan to mixed reactions — while survivors said it did not capture the horror, others claimed that J. Robert Oppenheimer’s guilt presented them with an alternative perspective. But the careful selection of the theatre for the Japanese premiere shows that even though films are shown in a darkened hall, the setting where it is seen matters as much as its content.
Suranjana Chandra, Calcutta
Veiled threat
Sir — The recent letter to the Chief Justice of India by a group of 600 lawyers alleging that a “vested interest group” is trying to pressurise the judiciary to influence judicial outcomes, especially those involving political figures, is nothing but a thinly veiled threat. These accusations are politically motivated. The country needs upright lawyers who will shun such letters and continue to fight against oppression.
Pronoy K. Ghosh, Jamshedpur
Sir — It is heartening that a group of 600 lawyers, including the senior lawyer, Harish Salve, expressed concern in a letter addressed to the CJI regarding attempts to put pressure on the judiciary to influence the judicial process. Such activities will tarnish the image of the courts and affect people’s trust in the judiciary.
Ananda Dulal Ghosh, Howrah
Sir — The lawyers’ letter to the CJI and its signatories — veteran lawyers such as Harish Salve and Adish Aggarwala — merit scrutiny. Salve, for instance, had recently pleaded for an extension of the submission date of electoral bond data on behalf of the State Bank of India. Aggarwala, on the other hand, wrote to the president, Droupadi Murmu, requesting a presidential reference against the electoral bonds verdict by the Supreme Court. Their discontent with the Supreme Court verdict and their association with this letter proves that it is an attempt to taint the judiciary and the Opposition.
M.N. Gupta, Hooghly
Frank admission
Sir — The Union finance minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, has apparently decided not to contest in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections for two reasons: she does not possess either the funds required for election campaigning or any “winnability criteria”. Even laypeople are aware that it is the political party that shoulders most of the financial burden for its candidates, especially those holding prominent positions like Sitharaman. The Bharatiya Janata Party has amassed a huge sum through electoral bonds and can surely spare some funds for Sitharaman’s campaign. She is afraid of the outcome of the elections in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, where she is infamous for her harsh behaviour and caustic words.
Tharcius S. Fernando, Chennai
Sir — Nirmala Sitharaman’s candour regarding not having enough money to contest in the Lok Sabha polls dents the image of the BJP given the astronomical sums it has amassed from electoral bonds. However, the Union finance minister’s frank admission was refreshing.
Gregory Fernandes, Mumbai
Sir — Nirmala Sitharaman seems to be aware that she might not win if she contests in the Lok Sabha elections as she has not worked earnestly for people’s welfare. It is unlikely that she could not gather the funds to fight the election. The INDIA bloc has recently commented on how the BJP’s time at the Centre is coming to an end due to its divisive politics and perhaps this has caused the finance minister to backtrack.
Bhagwan Thadani, Mumbai
