The essence of the judicial system is its impartiality, and it serves to regulate the actions of politicians. Without a legal framework, a Chief Minister could become a regional dictator.

Jagan Mohan Reddy is a criminal. As such, it’s hardly surprising that he should set out to discredit the justice system. There are currently 31 criminal cases pending against him, some dating back to his early years in politics. While his father was still in office, for example, Jagan was accused of selling state favour in cases of land allotment, mining leases, and licences for new industries – financial irregularities that amounted to 1172 crore rupees. The case never came before a court, yet Jagan spent sixteen months in prison before being released on bail in 2013.

Eleven of the cases pending against Jagan with the CBI are on charges of criminal conspiracy, cheating, dishonesty, accepting bribes, criminal breach of trust, forgery, criminal misconduct by a public servant, and prevention of corruption. Others, with the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), are for money laundering. Local cases filed with Andhra Pradesh and Telangana police allege criminal intimidation, rioting with deadly weapons, damage to public property, assault while preventing a public servant from doing his duty, and several others.

It is a fault in India’s justice system that these cases have yet to come to trial. And it is a fault in India’s democratic system that anyone with such serious cases pending against them can be elected to public office.

Yet justice and democracy are all we have to prevent a man like this from even greater abuses of power.

Jagan Mohan Reddy’s attack on the judiciary was sparked when Justice N.V. Ramana passed an order that pending cases against elected representatives should be dealt with. It is clearly in Jagan’s interests that his own 31 criminal cases should remain “pending” and never come to trial.

Jagan’s hubris has grown so great that he feels above the law, and able to question the integrity of one of the most respected judges in the country.

N.V. Ramana’s credentials and character are impeccable. He served as Judge in the Andhra Pradesh High Court from 2000-2013, and then as Chief Justice of Delhi’s High Court from 2013-14. Since then, he has been a Judge in the Supreme Court of India, and is in line to become India’s next Chief Justice after S.A. Bobde.

Until now, the judiciary has been one of the last remaining pillars of governance that still command public respect. Yet, in an age of social media when false allegations and fake news can proliferate faster than the spread of a virus, it is in danger.

N.V. Ramana has stated that “the country’s future is dependent on strong, independent judges”, and emphasised that this involves considerable self-sacrifice on the part of the judges themselves. Because judges must maintain strict impartiality, they are unable to speak in their own defence – and that makes them “soft targets for criticism.”

In the court of public opinion, Jagan stands a chance. He can claim power through making baseless attacks on the judicial system: on social media, unlike in court, he will never have to show any proof. It is enough to sow doubt.

And the seeds of doubt grow quickly. If he can get away with it, the way is open for other powerful figures to question the justice system, and in doing so to avoid justice itself.

The need for judicial independence means that N.V. Ramana himself cannot indulge in a war of words with Jagan, but other representatives of justice took up the case.

BJP leader and Supreme Court lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay wrote to the Attorney General of India, K.K. Venugopal, to initiate proceedings against Jagan for contempt of court. If the accusations were allowed to pass, he argued, it would set a precedent for politicians to make more “reckless allegations” against judges.

Another lawyer, Sunil Kumar Singh, petitioned the High Court to ban Jagan Mohan Reddy from making public statements against the judiciary. “What is at stake is the confidence that courts inspire in the public in a democracy ... Discussions can go wild in the media within hours or days and affect the image of the judiciary,” said Mr. Singh.

In total, three separate petitions were filed seeking a judicial inquiry against Jagan – one by the Anti-Corruption Council of India – as well as numerous letters of protest from organisations like the Supreme Court Bar Association.

Yet these petitions, so far, have been unsuccessful. The Attorney General declined Upadhyay’s request to take action, saying that although Jagan’s actions were clearly “prima facie contumacious [wilfully disobedient]” it would not be appropriate to act.

The Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde, responded by transferring the Chief Justices of the High Courts of both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, the two states where Jagan faces charges. In Andhra Pradesh, J.K. Maheshwari was replaced by A.K. Goswami on 6th January. Justice Rakesh Kumar said that this would cause delay in the pending CBI cases against Jagan, as well as proceedings around the three-capitals case in Andhra Pradesh, giving the Chief Minister an “undue advantage.”

Has Jagan got away with his contempt of justice? That remains to be seen. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh still has the power to thwart some of his ambitions: on 19th January they quashed a case of “insider trading” brought by the state government against private land buyers in Amaravati.

It is essential that the justice system continues to act with impartiality and integrity, and that the people of India can have faith in it. The alternative is to live in the world of Jagan Mohan Reddy, where corruption goes unquestioned and the truth is buried under false allegations.