Key Takeaways
- Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant delivered a lecture on “Artificial Intelligence and International Law” at Birkbeck College, London, during a UK visit.
- During the Q&A, an attendee attempted to raise concerns about growing hostility to dissent in India; the moderator declined to take the question, citing relevance to the lecture topic.
- Video clips of the exchange spread on social media, especially via the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), which took its name from the CJI’s earlier controversial remarks likening certain youths to “cockroaches.”
- The CJI later clarified that his comments were aimed at individuals with fake law degrees, not at youth in general, and said he was “pained” by media misrepresentation.
- The CJP has announced a planned protest in Delhi on 6 June demanding the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.
- A writ petition was filed before a CJI‑led bench seeking to restrict the commercial or selective use of courtroom recordings; the CJI dismissed it as non‑urgent.
- A similar incident occurred when Prime Minister Narendra Modi avoided questions during a joint statement with Norway’s PM, prompting criticism over press freedom.
- Indian officials characterized the Norway event as a pre‑arranged joint media statement, not an open press conference.
- Collectively, these episodes highlight tensions between India’s judiciary/executive and public criticism, raising questions about dissent, institutional image, and media freedom.
Setting the Scene: CJI Surya Kant’s London Lecture
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant visited the United Kingdom in May 2024 and delivered a lecture titled “Artificial Intelligence and International Law” at Birkbeck College, University of London. The talk was part of his official engagement abroad and attracted a mixed audience of academics, legal professionals, and members of the Indian diaspora. The lecture focused on how emerging AI technologies intersect with cross‑border legal frameworks, emphasizing the need for balanced regulation that safeguards rights while encouraging innovation.
The Audience’s Dissent‑Related Question
Following the lecture, an interactive session opened for questions. A woman in the audience began by complimenting the CJI’s remarks on India’s democratic record in the context of AI, then shifted to a pressing domestic issue: “We now hear from a number of legal observers within the country as well as internationally that there’s a great deal of concern about growing hostility to dissent within India.” She suggested that such hostility seemed reflected in the CJI’s recent public statements and was widely reported.
Moderator’s Refusal to Take the Question
Before the attendee could finish her query, a man on the stage—identified as the session’s moderator—interrupted, apologizing profusely and stating, “With all due respect, I’m so sorry, I would not be able to take up that question since the topic is concerning artificial intelligence and international law.” He repeated his apology and declared that the question would have to be cut off. The exchange ended abruptly, leaving the attendee unable to complete her point.
Social Media Circulation and the Cockroach Janta Party
Clips of the blocked question quickly spread on platforms such as X (formerly Twitter). They were reshared by Saurav Das, the chief spokesperson of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), and by numerous other users. The CJP, a nascent online movement, adopted its name from a controversial remark made by Justice Surya Kant earlier in May, in which he likened certain unemployed youths to “cockroaches.” The party used the video to amplify its critique of perceived judicial intolerance toward dissent and to mobilize public opinion.
Origin of the “Cockroach” Remark
On 15 May 2024, while hearing a petition for senior advocate designation in the Delhi High Court, Justice Surya Kant remarked: “There are already parasites of society who attack the system, and you want to join hands with them?” He continued, describing youngsters without jobs or professional placement as “cockroaches” who might become media persons, social‑media users, RTI activists, or other activists who “start attacking everyone.” He also expressed “serious doubts” about the authenticity of some Delhi‑based advocates’ law degrees and said the court was monitoring social‑media activity directed at the judiciary.
CJI’s Clarification and Expression of Pain
The following day, Justice Surya Kant issued a clarification, stating he was “pained” by media reports that suggested he had criticised the youth broadly. He claimed he had been “misquoted by a section of the media” and insisted his remarks were aimed specifically at individuals entering the legal profession with “fake and bogus degrees.” The CJI emphasized that his intent was to protect the integrity of the bar, not to disparage young people in general.
Rise of the Cockroach Janta Party and Planned Protest
In the wake of the clarification, the CJP gained visibility, framing itself as a voice for those allegedly marginalized by elitist attitudes within the legal and political establishments. The party announced plans for a massive protest in Delhi on 6 June 2024, demanding the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. The demonstrators intend to highlight issues of unemployment, educational access, and what they perceive as systemic hostility toward dissenting voices.
Legal Challenge Over Courtroom Recordings
On 25 May 2024, an advocate filed a writ petition before a bench led by CJI Surya Kant, seeking restraint on the commercial or selective use of oral exchanges during court proceedings. The petition argued that distorted and malicious narratives were being spread, demonising the institution’s image. It requested a declaration that such recordings should not be misused in ways that alter their meaning. The CJI responded, advising the petitioner not to take the matter “so sentimentally,” noting there was “no such great emergency” and indicating the court would consider the plea at a later date.
Parallel Incident Involving Prime Minister Modi in Norway
The London episode echoed a similar moment during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Norway in May 2024. After a joint statement with Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store concluded in Oslo without a formal Q&A, journalist Helle Lyng called out to Modi as he stepped away from the podium, asking why he did not take questions from “the freest press in the world.” Modi did not respond and walked away. Lyng later raised the issue at a Ministry of External Affairs briefing, questioning trust, human rights, and press freedom. Indian officials clarified that the event was a pre‑arranged joint media statement, not an open press conference, and therefore not scheduled for leader‑led questions.
Broader Implications for Dissent and Institutional Image
Together, these incidents underscore a growing friction between India’s highest constitutional authorities and segments of the public that voice criticism. The blocking of a dissent‑related question at an international academic forum, the rapid spread of related clips via social media, and the emergence of a protest movement named after a controversial judicial remark all point to heightened sensitivities around free expression. Simultaneously, legal attempts to curb the misuse of courtroom recordings reveal concerns about how judicial proceedings are portrayed in the public sphere. The parallel episode with the Prime Minister abroad suggests a broader pattern of limited engagement with probing questions, prompting domestic and international observers to scrutinize the state of press freedom, institutional accountability, and the space for dissent in contemporary India.