The Karjat Jamkhed Member of Legislative Assembly stated that while he holds the highest respect for the Indian judiciary, comments of this nature from a constitutional authority were deeply hurtful. He said the remarks appeared to ridicule an entire generation struggling with broken promises, limited opportunities, and rising unemployment.
The controversy stems from observations made by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi during proceedings in a matter related to petitions concerning holders of fake degrees and the conferment of senior advocate designation. During the hearing, the bench reportedly pulled up a lawyer for pursuing senior advocate designation and referred to the existence of “parasites” in society who attack the system, questioning whether the petitioner intended to associate with such elements.
According to the statement, the Chief Justice of India also compared some unemployed young individuals to “cockroaches”, remarking that they go on to become media representatives, social media commentators, and Right to Information activists who subsequently question and criticise the system.
Responding to these remarks, Rohit Pawar said that while the comments may have been made in a specific legal context, grouping unemployed youth, media professionals, and information activists under a negative label was inappropriate and damaging. He asserted that individuals such as Right to Information activists exposing corruption, legal journalists raising questions of transparency, and students speaking truth to power represent essential pillars of democracy.
Pawar further emphasised that today’s youth are not unemployed by choice but are victims of economic shortcomings and administrative inefficiencies. He stated that despite repeated assurances of employment generation and development, large numbers of educated young people continue to struggle for dignity, jobs, and survival while seeking accountability and platforms to express their concerns.
The Nationalist Congress Party leader urged the judiciary to exercise sensitivity, restraint, and constitutional wisdom while addressing issues concerning young citizens. He added that if institutions feel threatened by questions raised by the youth, the issue lies not with the youth but with the broader system itself.
The remarks have triggered a wider debate on the language used in judicial observations and the sensitivity required when addressing issues related to unemployment, criticism, and democratic participation, particularly in the context of rising economic pressure on young populations.
About The Author
.jpg)
-(1).jpg)
Comment List