The Daily Fix

The Daily Fix: The Madras High Court should avert speculation and deliver verdict in 18 MLAs case

Everything you need to know for the day (and a little more).

The Big Story: Undue delay

Judicial independence is not just about judges resisting executive interference in court appointments. Judicial independence also lies in the court’s ability to deliver justice swiftly and authoritatively, leaving no room for extraneous factors to influence the system. But when the higher judiciary drags its feet on cases of political and administrative importance, it is bound to raise awkward questions.

In Tamil Nadu, 18 Assembly constituencies have been functioning without legislators since September 18, 2017. These MLAs were disqualified because of the turmoil in the ruling All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. They belonged to the rival TTV Dinakaran faction and had been accused of spreading anti-government and anti-party propaganda. The more obvious reason, though, was that the Edappadi K Palaniswamy government’s wafer-thin majority in the Assembly. The Opposition has alleged that the 18 MLAs were disqualified with the ulterior motive of creating a false majority in the Assembly.

When a vacancy to an Assembly seat arises, the Election Commission of India is expected to fill the seat through a bye-election within six months so that residents do not suffer without a representative. The 18 legislators immediately challenged their disqualification in the High Court. The case was argued extensively for days and judgement was reserved by the bench headed by Chief Justice Indira Banerjee on January 23. However, the judgement is yet to be delivered.

In the meantime, the court went ahead with the verdict in another disqualification case that involved 11 MLAs of the O Panneerselvam faction, which in August buried its differences with Palaniswamy and merged with his faction. The High Court refused to assume the powers of the Speaker and disqualify them. In this case, the Opposition Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam had moved court seeking disqualification of these 11 MLAs for violating a whip and voting against the AIADMK government in a confidence motion in 2017. This judgement had been reserved in March, much after the court reserved its verdict in the 18 MLAs case.

It isn’t clear why the court chose to first dispose of a case reserved much later and why it has still not delivered its decision on the disqualification of the 18 MLAs of the Dinakaran faction, who are still opposed to the Palaniswamy government.

Over the years, the Supreme Court has provided guidelines on how to proceed when a judgement is delayed. If a verdict is reserved but not delivered for over three months, the parties have the right to move a petition seeking quick delivery. If there is a delay of over six months, the parties could ask for the case to be assigned to another bench. Undue delays in politically-sensitive matters could cast doubts in the minds of the people and prove as perilous as an attempt by the executive to influence the judiciary.


  1.   The growing conflict between Dalits and Hindutva must be seen in the context of the paradigm shift in Uttar Pradesh politics, says Zoya Hasan in The Hindu. 
  2. That 14 of the 15 most polluted cities in the world are in India points to a public health emergency, writes Darryl D’Monte in the Indian Express. 
  3.   Investments in irrigation, combined with better-quality seeds, can dramatically improve returns to farming, argues Bjorn Lomborg in Mint. 


Don’t miss

In Tamil Nadu, an attempt to revive an ancient lake management system faces challenges, reports Vinita Govindarajan.

“Under the scheme, the executive engineer of the Public Works Department works with either a group of farmers in the region, or a single farmer who is given permission to take up the work, or the Water User’s Association of the area. ‘The PWD [Public Works Department] is not supposed to hire any contractors,’ said Selvam. ‘Ideally, the farmer’s association should also not sub-contract the work.’”  

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Tracing the formation of Al Qaeda and its path to 9/11

A new show looks at some of the crucial moments leading up to the attack.

“The end of the world war had bought America victory but not security” - this quote from Lawrence Wright’s Pulitzer-Prize winning book, ‘The Looming Tower’, gives a sense of the growing threat to America from Al Qaeda and the series of events that led to 9/11. Based on extensive interviews, including with Bin Laden’s best friend in college and the former White House counterterrorism chief, ‘The Looming Tower’ provides an intimate perspective of the 9/11 attack.

Lawrence Wright chronicles the formative years of Al Qaeda, giving an insight in to Bin Laden’s war against America. The book covers in detail, the radicalisation of Osama Bin Laden and his association with Ayman Al Zawahri, an Egyptian doctor who preached that only violence could change history. In an interview with Amazon, Wright shared, “I talked to 600-something people, but many of those people I talked to again and again for a period of five years, some of them dozens of times.” Wright’s book was selected by TIME as one of the all-time 100 best nonfiction books for its “thoroughly researched and incisively written” account of the road to 9/11 and is considered an essential read for understanding Islam’s war on the West as it developed in the Middle East.

‘The Looming Tower’ also dwells on the response of key US officials to the rising Al Qaeda threat, particularly exploring the turf wars between the FBI and the CIA. This has now been dramatized in a 10-part mini-series of the same name. Adapted by Dan Futterman (of Foxcatcher fame), the series mainly focuses on the hostilities between the FBI and the CIA. Some major characters are based on real people - such as John O’ Neill (FBI’s foul-mouthed counterterrorism chief played by Jeff Daniels) and Ali Soufan (O’ Neill’s Arabic-speaking mentee who successfully interrogated captured Islamic terrorists after 9/11, played by Tahar Rahim). Some are composite characters, such as Martin Schmidt (O’Neill’s CIA counterpart, played by Peter Sarsgaard).

The series, most crucially, captures just how close US intelligence agencies had come to foiling Al Qaeda’s plans, just to come up short due to internal turf wars. It follows the FBI and the CIA as they independently follow intelligence leads in the crises leading up to 9/11 – the US Embassy bombings in East Africa and the attack on US warship USS Cole in Yemen – but fail to update each other. The most glaring example is of how the CIA withheld critical information – Al Qaeda operatives being hunted by the FBI had entered the United States - under the misguided notion that the CIA was the only government agency authorised to deal with terrorism threats.

The depth of information in the book has translated into a realistic recreation of the pre-9/11 years on screen. The drama is even interspersed with actual footage from the 9/11 conspiracy, attack and the 2004 Commission Hearing, linking together the myriad developments leading up to 9/11 with chilling hindsight. Watch the trailer of this gripping show below.


The Looming Tower is available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video, along with a host of Amazon originals and popular movies and TV shows. To enjoy unlimited ad free streaming anytime, anywhere, subscribe to Amazon Prime Video.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Amazon Prime Video and not by the Scroll editorial team.