Dr Deena Padayachee
Jolly LlbThis is not a jolly film at all. It probes the murky undercurrent of the legal world with a very sharp scalpel, exposing the most frightening secrets and the most dastardly deeds.We expect that those who act for the human rights of all to be absolutely honourable, morally and ethically upright characters. After all, how is a person supposed to have confidence in anything less than the most ethical and careful of beings to defend their human rights? One expects such highly schooled experts in the law to be fully conversant with all aspects of the law and to act always in the best interests of their clients, not in the best interests of their bank balances. We expect them to be students of human psychology, to understand human beings and not to play with their clients' careers, lives and families so that they can get more wealthy.We expect lawyers to behave with a sense of very great responsibility and respect, not only for their clients but for themselves, their profession and their country as a whole. They should not behave in a manner that brings their profession into disrepute.Well, we all know that, often, all that I have written does not happen. Many people are terrified of lawyers, and with good reason. From the days of ancient empires – whether Babylonian, Assyrian, Egyptian or Roman, tyrants have used clever, wily lawyers to create a strait- jacket of decrees and laws to keep their subject populations in check and pliable. They have used these beagles to extract the wealth of their subjects and destroy those who offended them. Sadly, most lawyers have over-valued themselves and over-priced their services. The Gandhis and Mandelas have been exceptions to the general rule. One must not be conned by these exceptions.The sum result is that the legal profession has often been at the sharp end of denying human beings their human rights and keeping them manacled. It all turned on power and money. Lawyers acted not upon on what was right but what was in their best interests. And we suffered. Boy, did we suffer.The depiction of India's legal profession in this film was graphic. Lawyers are shown in open-air 'offices' working on antiquated type- writers and in the most deplorable of circumstances – literally on the street. In the evenings they have to lock their equipment in steel trunks enclosed in chains. That's a lovely metaphor. And all around them, there is evidence of the dire poverty that is India, today – the filth, the disorder, the lack of planning, and the wretched souls who try, somehow, to survive.From this fetid cess-pit some men of the law, some men of words, like rats in a sewer, have been able to claw their way up to higher positions – but that was often done only by the most foul of means. Their means of survival are the tiny wealthy class that many societies sport all over the world. The off-spring of that class, spoilt,badly reared, arrogant, used to abusing everybody and having their own way, are the lawyers' meal-tickets.We see a lawyer from Meerut come to Delhi and tout for business. He is no paradigm of virtue. He notices another lawyer doing well by courting the media and the TV stations. So he does the same by delving into a case involving a young dilettante. A film which documents the clash between the young, aspiring lawyer and the experienced, sly, vicious, older senior counsel is the stuff of best-sellers and block-buster movies.However, this is South Africa. There were just six people in the cinema the night that I was there; at Gateway, the film was whipped off the circuit in double-quick time, no doubt to the relief of the legal beagles here, many of whinge about how they do so little business. The female lead, such as she is, is stunningly beautiful as Indian beauties can be – and she is loyal despite the penury of her beau – as long as he is ethical. More than that, she is, amazingly ethical and not materialistic at all. When her husband acquires cash by illegal means she promptly deserts him. She helps turn him away from his path of legal parasitism onto the road less well travelled. There might be females like this somewhere. I must say they are a rare breed.This is a film well worth watching and I savoured every moment of it as lawyers did all the things that we all know so well: steal from their clients, get their clients into further trouble so that they can benefit, give bad advice, and manipulate matters so that they can appear like supermen when, in reality they are vultures preying on those in trouble, those who are weak and those who have strayed from the path of the straight and narrow.Are there really so few in our country who are like me, and find such a well made film well worth watching? What kind of South Africans are we? Why do so many prefer to spend thousands at the casinos, at restaurants etc, rather than on supporting something well worth supporting.Ours is indeed a strange, often bizarre country.We have come through one of the greatest struggles for human rights in the world; we have made our mark on the history of the world and our planet has been the better for it, but, somewhere along the way, many seem to have lost their souls.
sunny-jindl2
1. 6 dead and only 5 dead bodies, really? 2. Why did the fake witness expose Boman Irani's plan to Arshad Warsi? 3. Within the lunch break in climax, Sub Inspector Rathi and Boman goto Police Station and come back, real quick. 4. S.I. Rathi had caught a wrong person as the 6th victim, how? He had seen the guy earlier. 5. After going through the thunderous accident, the culprit has enough energy to drive again to hit the witness (the sixth victim). And then he left the vehicle at the crime scene. 6. After being video taped by Police, vehicle disappears. This was a huge cover up, no one tried to explain. 7. There is a scene where the accused father threatens Boman to take the case awa from him to Jethmalani or Kapil. Is it a covert reference to BJP and INC big-wigs.
