Advertisement

Interpreting the Scales of Justice: Architecture, Symbolism and Semiotics of the Supreme Court of India

  • Shailesh Kumar
Article
  • 656 Downloads

Abstract

The neutrality of the art and architecture of courtrooms and courthouses has dominated the public perception in the Indian context. The courtroom design and the visual artistic elements present within these judicial places have very often been considered to be insignificant to the notions of law and justice that they reflect. As art and architecture present certain historical narratives, reflect political allegories and have significant impact on the perceptions of their viewers, they have critical socio-political ramifications. This makes it pertinent to explore them and investigate the paradox of their deployment and interpretation in today’s increasingly mediatized world. Through an ethnographic study of the Supreme Court of India, this paper interprets its art and architecture, and, the symbolism and semiotics reflected through them. Arguing against their neutrality and insignificance, the paper demonstrates how they reflect nationalism, certain ideologies and power-space dynamics. It further argues that they act as evidence of political metaphors related to justice, power and democracy. With a conversation between law, architecture and semiotics, the paper investigates the historical and spatial dimensions of its architecture and artistic elements. Mapping the Court’s architectural elements, I examine how the visual representation of ‘justice as virtue’ finds translation in its design through transfer of certain images, including the image of the ‘scales of justice’, into it, while absenting the notion of ‘justice as struggle’—to contemplate on how legal architecture gives evidence to the vexed relationship between law and justice and also of the break from the colonial past

Keywords

Legal architecture Supreme Court of India Semiotics Symbolism Building Justice 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Dr. Pratiksha Baxi for encouraging me to work in this area. Thanks to her, Dr. Nupur Chowdhury, Dr. Mani Shekhar Singh, Aklavya Anand and Noopur Maurya for the fruitful remarks. Comments from the reviewers and the audience were very insightful. An abridged version of this paper was presented at the 4th LASSnet International Conference, 10–12 December 2016, India Habitat Centre, New Delhi, India.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahl, Bjorn, and Hendrik Tieben. 2015. Modern Chinese court buildings, regime legitimacy and the public. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 28 (3): 603–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Almog, Shulamit. 2006. Creating representations of justice in the third millennium: Legal poetics in digital times. Rutgers Computer and Technology Law Journal 32: 183–245.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Almog, Shulamit, and Ely Aharonson. 2004. Law as film: Representing justice in the age of moving images. Canadian Journal of Law & Technology 3 (1): 1–18.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ambedkar, B.R. 2008. Writings and speeches: A ready reference manual. New Delhi: B. R. Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andhyarujina, T.R. 2008. Speaking justice to power. The Indian Express. http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/speaking-justice-to-power/280875/. 25 Mar 2016.
  6. 6.
    Andhyarujina, T.R. 2015. When the bench buckled: Emergency did not spare the Supreme Court because the tides of history do not pass judges by. The Indian Express. http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/when-the-bench-buckled/. 14 Feb 2016.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Austin, Granville. 1966. Indian constitution: Cornerstone of a nation. Bombay: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rumble, Wilfrid E. (ed.). 1995. Austin: The province of jurisprudence determined. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ball, Milner S. 1975. The play’s the thing: An Uncourtentific reflection on courts under the rubric of theater. Stanford Law Review 28 (1): 81–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bhargava, R.P. 1991. The chamber of princes. New Delhi: Northern Book Centre.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bobde, et al. 2016. Courts of India: Past to present. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Government of India.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bombay High Court Booklet. 2014. Mumbai.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. Photography: A middle-brow art. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bybee, Keith J. (ed.). 2007. Bench press: The collision of courts, politics, and the media. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carr, Edward Hallett. 1961. What is history? London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Carlen, Pat. 1976. The staging of magistrates’ justice. British Journal of Criminology 16 (1): 48–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    “CJI’s Courtroom.” Supreme Court of India. http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/gallery.htm. 9 Sept 2016.
  19. 19.
    Divan, Anil. 2008. A profile in judicial courage. The Hindu. http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/a-profile-in-judicial-courage/article1215366.ece. 20 Feb 2016.
  20. 20.
    Dovey, Kim. 1999. Framing places: Mediating power in the built environment. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Du, Biyu. 2015. Staging justice: Courtroom semiotics and the judicial ideology in China. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique (2). doi: 10.1007/s11196-015-9444-7.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Durrill, Wayne K. 2002. A tale of two courthouses: Civic space, political power, and capitalist development in a new south community, 1834–1940. Journal of Social History 35 (3): 659–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Foucault, Michel. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge & the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Foucault, Michel. 1980. Two lectures. In Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977, ed. Colin Gordon, 78–108. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Foucault, Michel. 1984. Space, knowledge and power. In The foucault reader, ed. Paul Rabinow. New York: Patheon Books.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Geuss, Raymond. 2013. Politics and architecture. In Architecture and justice: Judicial meanings in the public realm, ed. Jonathan Simon, Nicholas Temple, and Renee Tobe, 267–280. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goodrich, Peter. 1988. Modalities of annunciation: An introduction to courtroom speech. In Law and semiotics, vol. 2, ed. Roberta Kevelson, 143–165. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haldar, Piyel. 1994. In and out of court: On topographies of law and the architecture of court buildings (A study of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel). International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 7 (20): 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Haldar, Piyel. 1999. The function of the Ornament in Quintilian, Alberti, and Court Architecture. In Law and the image: The authority of art and the aesthetics of law, ed. Costas Douzinas, and Lynda Nead, 117–136. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hightower, Ben, and Kirsten Anker. 2015. (Re)imagining law: Marginalised bodies/indigenous spaces. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 5. doi: 10.1007/s11196-015-9454-5.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    “History of the Supreme Court of India.” http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/history.htm. 10 July 2016.
  33. 33.
    Inaugural Proceeding of the Supreme Court of India, (1950) 1 SCR 3.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    “Indian National Emblem.” National Portal of India. https://india.gov.in/india-glance/national-symbols. 2 Oct 2016.
  35. 35.
    Jaising, Indira. 2016. “An open letter to India’s judges on what counts as ‘Anti-National.’” The Wire. http://thewire.in/2016/03/04/an-open-letter-to-indias-judges-on-what-counts-as-anti-national-23764/. 17 April 2016.
  36. 36.
    Jay, Martin. 1999. Must justice be blind? The challenge of images to the law. In Law and the image: The authority of art and the aesthetics of law, ed. Costas Douzinas, and Lynda Nead, 19–35. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jha, Shivakant. 2011. On the loom of time: An autobiographical memoir. New Delhi: Taxmann Publications Pvt. Ltd.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Johnson, David A. 2015. Competing visions of empire in the colonial built environment: Sir Bradford Leslie and the building of New Delhi. Britain and the World 8 (1): 27–50. doi: 10.3366/brw.2015.0166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Johnson, David, and Richard Watson. 2015. New Delhi—The last imperial city. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kannabiran, K.G. 2001. Manu’s statue. PUCL Bulletin. www.pucl.org/reports/National/2001/manu.htm. August 12, 2016.
  41. 41.
    Khanna, H.R. 2003. Neither roses nor thorns. Lucknow: Eastern Book Company.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kirpal, B.N., et al. (eds.). 2000. Supreme but not infallible. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kumar, Raj (ed.). 2003. Essays on legal systems in India. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lefebvre, Henri. 1976. Reflections on the politics of space (trans: Michael Enders) Antipode 8: 30–37.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Laslett, Peter (ed.). 1988. Locke: Two treatises of government (Cambridge texts in the history of political thought). UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lounsbury, Carl R. 2005. The courthouses of early Virgnia: An architectural history. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Masterman, Roger. 2009. Review of Lieve Gies, Law and the media: The future of an uneasy relationship (2007) and K.J. Bybee (ed), Bench Press: The collision of courts, politics and the media (2007). Social and Legal Studies 18 (2): 275–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    McDougall, Robert. 2016. Designing the Courtroom of the Future. In Paper delivered at the international conference on court excellenceSingapore (January), pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    McNamara, M. 2004. From Tavern to Courthouse: Architecture and Ritual in American Law-1658–1860. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mehrotra, Rahul, Prasad Shetty, and Rupali Gupte. 2009. Architecture and contemporary indian identity. In Constructing identity in contemporary architecture: Case studies from the South, ed. Peter Herrle, and Stephanus Schmitz. Munster: LIT.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Melhuish, Clare. 1966. Ada Melamede and Ram Karmi: Supreme Court of Jerusalem and House in Tel. Architectural Design 66 (11–12): 35–39.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mitra, Dola. 2016. 32 Spokes of wisdom. Outlook India. http://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/32-spokes-of-wisdom/296362. 12 Feb 2016.
  53. 53.
    Moran, Leslie J. 2014. Mass-mediated ‘open justice’: Court and judicial reports in the Press in England and Wales. Legal Studies 34 (1): 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Moran, Leslie J. 2009. Judging pictures: A case study of portraits of the chief justices, Supreme Court of New South Wales. International Journal of Law in Context 5 (3): 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Moran, Leslie J. 2012. Every picture speaks a thousand words: Visualising judicial authority in the press. In Intersections of law and culture, ed. Priska Gisler, Sara Steinert Borella, and Caroline Wiedmer. Palgrave: Basingstoke.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Moran, Leslie J. 2012. Review essay: Visual justice. International Journal of Law in Context 8 (3): 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Morrison, Charles. 1968. Social organization at the district courts: Colleague relationships among Indian lawyers. Law and Society Review 3 (2/3): 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mulcahy, Linda. 2011. Legal architecture: Justice, due process and the place of law. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Naoroji, Dadabhai. 1901. Poverty and un-British rule in India. London: S. Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nariman, Fali S. 2010. Before memory fades: An autobiography. New Delhi: Hay House.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Nead, Lynda. 2002. Visual cultures of the courtroom: Reflections on history, law and the image. Visual Culture in Britain 3 (2): 119–141.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Parelkar, S.H. 1959. Architect and society. In Seminar on architecture, ed. Achyut P. Kanvinde, 85–88. New Delhi: Lalit Kala Akademi.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Parker, J.E.K. 2011. The soundscape of justice. Griffith Law Review 20 (4): 962–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Patel, Zarina, and Clinton David van der Merwe. 2013. Constitution hill: Just space or space of justice? In Architecture and justice: Judicial meanings in the public realm, eds. Jonathan Simon, Nicholas Temple, and Renee Tobe, 115–130. Surrey, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    “Preamble, The Constitution of India.” Ministry of Law and Justice, India. http://lawmin.nic.in/coi/preamble.pdf. 18 Aug 2016.
  66. 66.
    Purie, Mandira. 2014. Judiciary: The unwanted mother. India Today.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Resnik, Judith. 2010. Bring Back Bentham: ‘Open Courts’, ‘Terror Trials’, and public sphere(s). Journal of Law and Ethics of Human Rights 5 (1): 1–89.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Resnik, Judith. 2013. The democracy in courts: Jeremy Bentham, ‘Publicity’, and the privatization of process in the twenty-first century. No Foundations 10: 77–119.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Resnik, Judith, and Dennis Curtis. 2007. Representing justice: From renaissance iconography to twenty-first-century courthouses. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 151 (2): 139.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Resnik, Judith, and Dennis Curtis. 2010. Object lesson: On and off her pedestal. Yale Alumni Magazine. https://yalealumnimagazine.com/articles/3010/object-lesson. 1 May 2016.
  71. 71.
    Resnik, Judith, and Dennis Curtis. 2011. Representing justice: Invention, controversy, and rights in city-states and democratic courtrooms. Yale University Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=yzD1z7i8Md4C&pgis=1.
  72. 72.
    Resnik, Judith, and Dennis Curtis. 2013. Inventing democratic courts: A new and iconic Supreme Court. Journal of Supreme Court History 38 (2): 207–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Resnik, Judith, Dennis Curtis, and Allison Tait. 2014. Constructing courts: Architecture, the ideology of judging, and the public sphere. In Law, culture and visual studies, ed. Anne Wagner, and Richard K. Sherwin, 515–546. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-9322-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Rosenbloom, Jonathan D. 1998. Social ideology as seen through courtroom and courthouse architecture. Columbia-VLA Journal of Law & the Arts 22 (4): 463–523.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Rowden, Emma. 2013. Virtual courts and putting ‘Summary’ back into ‘Summary Justice’: Merely brief, or unjust? In Architecture and justice: Judicial meanings in the public realm, ed. Jonathan Simon, Nicholas Temple, and Renee Tobe. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
  77. 77.
    Sankaranarayanan, Gopal. 2008. Significance of Supreme Court’s architecture. Law and Other Things: November 16. http://lawandotherthings.blogspot.in/2008/11/significance-of-supreme-courts.html.
  78. 78.
    Sarat, Austin, and Patricia Ewick (eds.). 2015. The handbook of law and society. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sarat, Austin, and Thomas R. Kearns (eds.). 2002. History, memory, and the law. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    “SCVMS.” Supreme Court of India. http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/scvms.htm. 19 Feb 2016.
  81. 81.
    Seagle, William. “Rudolf Von Ihering: Or law as a means to an end. The University of Chicago Law Review 71–89.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Singha, Radhika. 1998. A despotism of law: Crime and justice in early colonial India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Spaulding, Norman W. 2012. The enclosure of justice: Courthouse architecture, due process, and the dead metaphor of trial. Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities 24(1): 311–343. http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjlh/vol24/iss1/16.
  84. 84.
    “Supreme Court of India, Tilak Marg.” Google maps (Satellite view).Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    “The Nagpur High Court Building.” Wikimapia. http://wikimapia.org/119856/High-Court-Nagpur-Bench#/photo/4686766. 28 Aug 2016.
  86. 86.
    “The Supreme Court Building.” Supreme Court of the United States. http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/courtbuilding.aspx. 13 Feb 2016.
  87. 87.
    The Supreme Court of India Annual Report. 2007–2008. New Delhi.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    The Supreme Court of India Annual Report. 2014. New Delhi.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    The Supreme Court of India. 2000. Sentinel of freedom. New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    The Times of India (1861-current). 1954a. Grand building planned for Supreme Court: Temple of justice will cost Rs. 45 lakhs. ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Times of India, Oct. 29, p. 5.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    The Times of India (1861-current). 1954b. Ousting jurisdiction of courts: Resort only in rare cases, says president. ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Times of India, Oct. 30, p. 7.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    The Times of India (1861-current). 1954c. Supreme Court. ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Times of India, Aug. 31, p. 8.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    The Times of India (1861-current). 1958. ‘Legal procedures need to be simplified’: President declares open Supreme Court building. ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Times of India, Aug. 5, p. 1.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    “The West Pediment.” Supreme Court of the United States. https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/archdetails.aspx. 21 Sept 2016.
  95. 95.
    Time. 1945. Art: Orozco v. Biddle. Time. http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,886563,00.html. 17 Mar 2016.
  96. 96.
    Wagner, Anne, and Richard K. Sherwin (eds.). 2014. Law, culture and visual studies. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-9322-6.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Wallis, Mieczyslaw. 1973. Semantic and symbolic elements in architecture: Iconology as a first step towards an architectural semiotic. Semiotica 8 (3): 220–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for the Study of Law and GovernanceJawaharlal Nehru UniversityNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations