An Innovative Experiment In Crowdfunding For PIL In SC: CJAR Leads The Way

There is much heated discussion around the latest Supreme Court (SC) judgment in the Prasad Education Trust case, which involves allegations of corruption against top judiciary members, including retired Orissa High Court judge Ishrat Masroor Quddusi. Things took a sharp turn in the case, when on the 1^st of December 2017, the Supreme Court bench headed by Justice RK Agrawal and comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice AM Khanwilkar dismissed the plea of the leading NGO, Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms (CJAR), which was requesting a court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the allegations of bribery, and also imposed a cost of Rs. 25 lakh on it. The case threw up several legal questions, including whether a person can be a judge in their own cause or not, and whether the independence of the judiciary would be compromised or not when a government-controlled body like CBI pursues an investigation in a matter concerning charges of corruption against top members of the judiciary.

In order to fight against the cost imposed by the SC and pursue the matter further, the NGO, CJAR, put out a call for crowdfunding to pay the cost. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who is also the convener of the CJAR and a crusading anti-corruption activist, explains the importance of this case. In his own words, “The CBI had registered an FIR regarding conspiracy, planning and preparation to pay bribes to obtain a favourable judgment from the Supreme Court. CJAR filed a petition seeking an independent SIT investigation into this matter to be monitored by the Supreme Court. Rather than taking note of the serious allegations and taking steps to restore the credibility of the judiciary, the Supreme Court has imposed costs of Rs. 25 lakh on CJAR in a bid to deter it from taking up such cases of judicial corruption.”

Challenging this judgment, Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the CJAR, has decided to seek review of the judgment. Bhushan, in a first-of-a-kind attempt, has been trying to raise funds to fight the cost through crowdfunding. Crowdfunding can be understood as a practice of soliciting financial contributions of small amounts from a large number of people, most popularly from an online community.

In this case, the CJAR resorted to crowdfunding via the platform facilitated by BitGiving.com. This website enables organizations and creators of all kinds to come together in a bid to raise funds online and share their stories. It has previously supported campaigns to raise money for acid attack survivors and to help provide relief response to those affected in the massive earthquake in Nepal. Ishita Anand, CEO of crowdfunding website BitGiving, told LiveLaw:  “We, at BitGiving, are proud to host Prashant Bhushan's campaign. It’s amazing to see such causes being supported by many individuals and proves that there is always a community which is waiting to be heard. This campaign validates that crowdfunding is a transparent process and brings together people from various walks of life to make a difference.”

The CJAR plans on filing a review and curative petition against the order by the SC that imposed the hefty fine alongside dismissing its plea. The judgment has been criticized in a strong-worded statement issued by former Supreme Court judge Justice GS Singhvi, former Law Commission chairman Justice AP Shah, former Chief Information Commissioners Wajahat Habibullah and Shailesh Gandhi, and activist Aruna Roy.

Neelima Jaiswal, one of the many contributors to the campaign run by Bhushan, was quoted as saying: “CJAR is engaged in a struggle for protecting the integrity of the judiciary. It is our duty to come to its help in its hour of need.” Another fellow contributor to the campaign, Manoj Mishra, expressed that “the judicial accountability shall ultimately strengthen the judicial system. It is a must for an accountable polity and a healthy nation”.

Such crowdfunding appeals for justice have previously taken place in the United Kingdom when relatives of British soldiers killed in Iraq War had launched an online fundraising appeal to take legal action against Tony Blair and other government officials. Also, the families of the victims of the Birmingham pub bombing had launched a global appeal to crowdsource judicial review against non-investigation of the alleged bombers. Amnesty International holds that crowdsourced justice via pro bono contributions make up for the deficit against erosion of legal aid and underfunding of judicial institutions.

So far, this innovative initiative of raising money to cover costs for a public interest matter through crowdfunding looks promising, having managed to raise 30% of the total target amount of Rs 30,00,000, and with more and more people taking the cause to fight out, it is taking the shape of a mass movement and participatory public interest litigation. If successful, the crowdfunding initiative could herald a new beginning for how public interest movements are perceived and conducted in India.