Nothing undermines society like lawlessness at the top. In the latest count, there are 4,400 criminal cases against sitting and former members of parliament and members of the legislative assembly pending before the courts. These have been hanging fire for years, some reportedly for decades. In December 2017, the Supreme Court had asked for designated courts in each state to expedite these cases; in September this year, it had asked that the chief justices of the respective high courts preside over special benches to the same end. It is a blatant display of political — governmental — unwillingness that the Supreme Court should repeatedly have to insist that legislators with criminal cases be tried in time. That is the basic duty of any State that wishes to appear lawful. Anything else is to set an example of lawlessness that suggests it is possible for anyone to get away with crime if they have the right connections — something that seems to have become part of common belief. Yet a rapid disposal of cases against politicians would identify those guilty while also weeding out politically motivated charges.

Although 23 high courts agreed to set up designated courts, progress has not been satisfactory. The Supreme Court reportedly had occasion to admonish the governments of Kerala and West Bengal after the Kerala High Court complained that the nexus between politicians and police led to the state police’s reluctance to carry out arrest warrants on accused politicians. The situation was evidently similar in West Bengal. This complaint goes to the heart of the matter: the misuse of power. The delay in process at every level leads to cases taking years to come to trial, thus weakening evidence and thinning out witnesses. The need for speedy trial for accused lawmakers, who are elected to formulate policies for the welfare and progress of the country, is the argument offered against the Madras High Court’s recent scruples in creating a designated court. Legislators are meant to uphold constitutional morality; they cannot be allowed to enjoy protracted trials when they are under the shadow of criminal offences, some allegedly heinous ones. While it is encouraging that 23 high courts have endorsed the Supreme Court’s view on urgency, governments must cooperate too, in order to show their willingness to bring tainted legislators to justice.