Tension at London university event with CJI as participant raises questions about ‘dissent in India’; CJP reacts | Today’s news
At an event held at the University of London where Surya Kant spoke, the organizers reportedly limited questions unrelated to the topic of artificial intelligence and asked participants to focus on the topic.
During the session, one participant tried to question him about India’s democratic record and alleged concerns about suppressing dissent in the context of AI governance. However, the moderator said such questions were off topic, leading to a tense exchange between the participants and the organizers, PTI reported.
Read also | Schwabí Janta Party Protest LIVE: CJP issues instructions for protest. Details
Saurav Das shared a video that claimed the Chief Justice of India was heckled during the event, with a student exhorting, “Please give us some respect,” amid a row over the questioning.
How was the CJP set up?
The ‘Cockroach Janta Party’ (CJP) parody – an echo of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been gaining millions of online followers on social media since it was launched last month.
The CJP was formed after Chief Justice Surya Kant allegedly called youths who criticized the government “cockroaches” and “parasites” during a hearing. Kant later said that his comments were taken out of context.
Read also | ‘Rancho’ Sonam Wangchuk joins Cockroach Janta Party’s ‘peaceful’ protest
Dipke, a political communications strategist who previously worked with the opposition Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), created a fictitious party online on May 16.
Dipke called for the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who faced criticism over alleged irregularities in several key examinations.
What did the CJI say about AI?
The CJI said that unlike previous technological revolutions, AI not only enhances human capacity; they are increasingly involved in decision-making processes that have historically been considered uniquely human.
“Technology itself is neither inherently benevolent nor inherently harmful. Its impact depends on the legal, political, and ethical frameworks within which societies choose to deploy it. The law’s responsibility is therefore neither to impede technological progress nor to unquestioningly surrender it. Its responsibility is to ensure that technological power remains accountable to constitutional values, democratic legitimacy, and human dignity.”
Justice Kant said artificial intelligence is now an operational reality that is reshaping government, commerce, warfare, communications, public administration and, increasingly, the very exercise of judicial and sovereign power.
Read also | Bar Council advocates debunking CJI ‘cockroach’ – 40% of lawyers have fake degrees
Opportunities to enhance the administration of justice and across jurisdictions, courts are increasingly using AI-driven tools to assist with legal research, case management, translation services, transcription of proceedings, document classification and identification of judicial precedents.
“When deployed responsibly and under proper human oversight, such technologies can help reduce delays, improve efficiency, expand access to legal information, and allow judges and court administrators to focus their attention on the more nuanced and naturally human aspects of judicial decision-making. AI should therefore not be seen only as a source of legal complexity, but also as a powerful tool for advancing the constitutional and effective promise of timely and accessible justice.”
Read also | Why AI systems may never be safe and what to do about it
“The model can be trained on data sets collected in different jurisdictions, refined using computing infrastructure located elsewhere, deployed through cloud systems spanning multiple continents, and ultimately produce decisions affecting individuals far from all points in the chain,” he said.
Thanking Birkbeck College for hosting this important conversation, CJI said in moments of profound technological transformation, dialogue between courts, universities, governments and civil societies becomes indispensable.
(With input from agencies)
