OF 2018 Dr. Shashi Tharoor … Complaina

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

IN THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

CMP No. ______OF 2018

Dr. Shashi Tharoor … Complainant

Versus

Ravi Shankar Prasad … Accused

Name and Address of the Complainant:

Dr. Shashi Tharoor, aged 64 years,

VERSUS

Name and Address of the Accused:

Ravi Shankar Prasad, aged 64 years

COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT UNDER SECTIONS 190 AND 200 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 READ WITH SECTIONS 499 AND 500 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AGIANST THE ACCUSED PERSON FOR MAKING DEFAMATORY REMARKS AGAINST THE COMPLAINANT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. That the present Complaint is being preferred by the above named Complainant under Sections 190 and 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (herein after referred to as “Code” or “IPC”) against the

Accused Person for making defamatory remarks against the Complainant while making false and defamatory statements and posting video clips of the Press Conference of the accused in Twitter on 28/10/2018 around 5.30 A.M. Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

2. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad, the accused is the Union Minister for Law and Justice, Electronics and Information Technology. He is a Member of the Ruling Bharatiya Janatha Party and he represents the State of Bihar as a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha. He is an eminent lawyer and he is also a designated Senior Advocate in the Supreme Court of India.

BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE COMPLAINANT

3. That the Complainant herein is an Indian citizen and is an eminent personality in Indian Politics. The Complainant has earned substantial reputation over the years for his impeccable work as an author, Politician, and former international civil servant. The Complainant is currently a Member of Parliament in the Lok Sabha representing the Thiruvananthapuram constituency. It is humbly stated that the Complainant has a large following in the constituency of Thiruvananthapuram and was ﬁrst elected as a Member of Parliament in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. He was re-elected by the people of Thiruvananthapuram in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. In addition, the Complainant has previously served as the Minister of State for Human Resource Development and Minister of State for External Affairs in the Government of India.

4. That prior to entering the public life as a Politician, the Complainant served as a peacekeeper, refugee worker, and administrator at the highest level in the United Nations. He also served as Under-Secretary General in the United Nations during the leadership of Mr. Kofi Annan. The Complainant is also an award-winning Author of works of both fiction as well as non-fiction and has gathered immense reputation across the world through his writings. The Complainant has also held several positions of responsibilities and has been awarded with numerous awards and recognitions for his work.

5. That while serving at the United Nations, the Complainant held key responsibilities in peace-keeping after the Cold War and served as a Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Senior Adviser to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Complainant also held the position of Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information.

6. That it must also be added here that the Complainant was even named the ‘Global Leader of Tomorrow’ in 1998 by the very prestigious World Economic Forum.

7. That the Complainant completed his Ph.D. [Doctor of Philosophy] in the year 1978 at the prestigious Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. While completing his Ph.D., he received the Robert B. Stewart Prize for Best Student and also helped in settling up the prestigious ‘Fletcher Forum of International Affairs’. The Complainant also served as the ﬁrst Editor of the acclaimed ‘Fletcher Forum of International Affairs Journal’.

8. That in addition to the above, the Complainant was also awarded an Honorary D.Litt. [Doctor Litterarum] by the University of Puget Sound and a Doctorate Honoris Causa in History by the University of Bucharest. Therefore, the Complainant has gained enormous reputation over the years.

9. That after working with the United Nations for almost Thirty (30) years, the Complainant returned to India and contested the 2009 Lok Sabha Elections. Due to immense reputation created by the Complainant through his illustrious career, social work and body of literary work, the Complainant got elected from the Thiruvananthapuram constituency and was thereafter re-elected in the 2014 Lok Sabha Elections.

10. That during his political career, the Complainant has held and managed key positions of responsibilities, and has served as Member-Convenor of the Parliamentary Forum on Disaster Management and as a member of the Standing Committee on External Affairs, the Consultative Committee on Defense, the Public Accounts Committee and the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Telecoms. The Complainant also served as the Chairman of the Standing Committee on External Affairs and as a member of the Standing Committee on Rules. Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

11. That the achievements and laurels of the Complainant are not limited only to his political career and role in the United Nations. The Complainant is a celebrated author of Sixteen (16) books and a prominent contributor to some of the leading newspapers and journals of the world. He has authored hundreds of articles, op-eds, and book reviews in a wide range of publications including the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, International Herald Tribune, TIME, Newsweek, and The Times of India. The Complainant also served for two years as a Contributing Editor and occasional columnist for Newsweek International. He has regularly authored columns for the Indian Express (1991-93 and 1996-2001), The Hindu (2001-2008), The Times of India (2007-2009), The Asian Age/Deccan Chronicle (2010-2012) and Mail Today 2012), and regularly contributes on www.ndtv.com and The Quint, and publishes an internationally syndicated monthly column through Project Syndicate. The Complainant, due to his contributions across the world, is a highly recognizable and immensely respectable personality.

12. That the Complainant has been the recipient of several prestigious awards that include a Commonwealth Writers Prize and the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman, which is India's highest honour for overseas nationals. It is necessary to mention here that the Complainant has earned the respect and gratitude of several foreign nations as well, and the same is evident from the fact that in 2012 the King of Spain awarded him the Encomienda de la Real Order Espanola de Carlos III. The Complainant has also the ‘New Age Politician of the Year’ Award from NDTV, the Hakim Khan Sur Award for National Integration, and the Priyadarshini Award for Excellence in Diplomacy. Therefore, a person, who has been a recipient of such prestigious and illustrious awards and honours across the world, has extremely high standards of reputation and a vast number of followers and the same is evident from the social media account of the Complainant on Twitter, where he has over 5.2 million followers. Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

13. That the Complainant has held numerous positions of high responsibility and also served on the Board of Overseers of the acclaimed Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, the Board of Trustees of the Aspen Institute, and the Advisory Boards of the Indo-American Arts Council, the American India Foundation, the World Policy Journal, the Virtue Foundation and the Human Rights Organization Breakthrough. The Complainant has always been a prominent human rights advocate and based on his achievements and diligence, he was appointed as an International Adviser to the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva for the period between 2008 – 2011. He was also a Fellow of the New York Institute of the Humanities and the Patron of the Dubai Modern School, and serves on the Advisory Council of The Hague Institute for International Justice.

BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE ACCUSED PERSON

14. That the Accused is a Member of the ruling Bharatiya Janatha Party. He is a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha representing the State of Bihar and he is now discharging his duties as the Union Minister of Law and Justice and Electronics and Information Technology. He is an eminent lawyer and also a designated Senior Advocate in the Supreme Court of India. The gravity of the culpable act of the accused can be assessed from the fact that he possesses very deep knowledge on the law of the land and he knows what the term Murderer means and includes. By any stretch of imagination, the tag of murderer cannot be extended to the complainant for the reasons stated hereafter. Being a member of the legal profession, he must have weighed his words before speaking them against an eminent personality and he should not have stooped to the level of a stooge of the ruling political party.

ORIGIN OF THE PRESENT DISPUTE

15. That the Complainant’s late wife, Mrs. Sunanda Pushkar Tharoor was a businesswoman and a philanthropist who passed away on 17.01.2014 in Hotel Leela Palace, New Delhi. Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

16. That the investigation into the death of the Deceased is completed now and the Delhi Police has ﬁled Final Report before the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Courts. The complainant is made an accused in the said case and he is charge-sheeted under Sections 306 and 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. The Final Report does not say that the death of the deceased was a murder. As such the complainant, is facing the trial, and he is ready to prove his innocence before the Court of Law. It is also to be borne in mind that the complainant herein who is the accused in the case is presumed to be innocent until he is proven guilty. This is one of the basic tenets of the Criminal Jurisprudence and such an assumption has to be extended to the complainant herein also. He has tendered appearance before the Court of Law on receiving the Summons and he was granted Bail by the Honourable Court on his appearance. It was after much pressure from the external power centers that the Delhi Police has charge-sheeted the accused even many years after the death of his beloved wife. According to the complainant it was a conspiracy to frame him in a false case that ended in his charge-sheeting in the said case.

17.On October 28th 2018, around 5:38 AM, the accused had posted a 2 minute 16 seconds video clip of his press conference along with certain false, untrue, malicious and highly defamatory statements in Twitter.

DEFAMATORY CONTENT

18. The contents of the Impugned Tweet/Post are reproduced herein below:

“Shashi Tharoor who is accused in a murder case has attempted to disrespect Lord Shiva. I seek a reply from Rahul Gandhi who claims himself to be a Bhakt of Lord Shiva on this horriﬁc denunciation of Hindu gods by a Congress MP.

Rahul Gandhi must apologize to all Hindus.” Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

The two minute sixteen seconds video clip posted in the Impugned Post/ Tweet is transcribed below:

“This is a tragedy of our times the Congress party which seeks to represent the heritage of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Ji, today has reduced itself as the party of abuse, baseless allegations under the leadership of Shri Rahul Gandhi. The entire country is watching the way he is seeking to shower below standard shameless abuses on your Prime Minister who is also a global leader; Narendra Modi.

Mr. Shashi Tharoor is charge-sheeted in a serious allegation of murder. I don’t want to give him more respect and prestige by responding to his baseless allegations. But the larger issue is while Rahul Gandhi claims himself to be a “Shiv Bhakht”, one of his small leaders has almost abused the sanctity of the “Shiv Linga” and Lord Mahadev by referring to the Chaapal attack through unnamed sources. This is despicable, deployed and downright viliﬁcation of great god of Hindu faith. Mr Rahul Gandhi, you claim yourself to be a Shiv Bhakt, please reply to this very horriﬁc denunciation of Lord Mahadev by giving an analogy to what Mr Tharoor has done? The entire country is watching you and your party. This only shows your desperation. They will reply but at least you stop this whole hypocrisy and double thought as far as being Shiv Bhakt and respecting the Hindu faith is concerned.”

19. A perusal of the Impugned post/tweet with the video clip and the statements, makes it abundantly clear that, the accused has purposefully lied to the public with the culpable and malicious intention to defame the complainant and thereby to spread an untrue, false and scandalous imputation against the complainant that he is an accused in a case of “murder” and that he has been charge-sheeted for the

offence of “murder”. Both as a member of the general public who is Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

aware of the current affairs of the country and also as a person who holds the very esteemed post of the Union Law Minister for India, the accused must be well aware that the complainant is not charge-sheeted by Police and he is not an accused in a case of murder. Being the person who heads the Ministry of Law and Justice, the topmost organ of the Union Government responsible for the administration of the Law and Justice System of the country, the accused person must have been truthful, honest, correct and highly responsible for the public statements he had made, as the people who view or read his statements will tend to relate such statements to the ofﬁce he holds and the accused must be held to be aware of that. The scandalous, false and defamatory statements the accused has published against the complainant are explicitly intended to harm the reputation of the complainant and to malign him before the public by intentionally giving such false and untrue statements, the colour of his ofﬁce. It is evident that the Impugned post/tweet and the contents are solely intended to malign and tarnish the reputation of the complainant.

20. It is abundantly clear that the accused has misused the content the complainant’s speech and distorted it and deliberately and with a mala ﬁde intention picked it out of context and misapplied it in his condemnable act to tarnish the reputation and fame of the complainant. Using the occasion the accused has intentionally and deliberately with the clear cut intention to damage and harm the reputation of the complainant published the false imputation against him that the complainant is an accused in a murder case and that he has been charge-sheeted for the offence of murder. The accused herein is well aware that in the ongoing criminal case against the complainant in relation to the death of his late wife Sunanda Pushkar, the offence alleged by the prosecution against him is not that of murder punishable under section 302 of IPC but that of offence punishable under sections 306 and 498A IPC and the Hon’ble Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Patiala House Courts is yet to frame any charge against the complainant. Through the purposeful comment of the accused that the Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Court has already charge-sheeted the complainant in an offence of murder seems to have some oblique motives behind it as the said comments have come from a person who is none other than the Union

Minister for Law and Justice. At any rate the intention and

purpose behind the accused’s false and baseless imputations against the complainant is clearly to harm, tarnish and malign his reputation and to destroy his impeccable image that the complainant enjoys among the public, especially in view of the oncoming Lok Sabha elections. As a result of the accused’ intentional wrong and dishonest imputations, many people have already started to think that the ongoing criminal prosecution against the complainant is really for the offence of murder and that the Police has in fact charge sheeted the complainant for the offence of murder. The complainant and those who are near and close to him have already receiving queries over phone and also by the word of mouth that whether the offence alleged against the complainant is really one that of murder and that whether he was actually charge sheeted for the offence of murder. These developments are highly destructive to the public image, good reputation and fame enjoyed by the complainant within his constituency and beyond.

21. That being aggrieved by such acts of the Accused, the Complainant sent a lawyer notice to the accused dated 30th October, 2018 calling upon him to tender an unconditional and written apology within 48 hours of the receipt of the Notice, for making such an untrue, false and baseless imputation against Dr. Shashi Tharoor. He was also called upon to delete and remove the 2 minute 16 seconds video clip of his press conference along with those false, untrue, malicious and highly defamatory statements in Twitter within the said time frame in compliance to the Notice and to publish an unconditional apology as required by Dr. Shashi Tharoor. The complainant also cautioned him about the consequences of a litigation which may be commenced in both civil and criminal lines

in case of his non-compliance. The notice was intended to caution the Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Accused against the defamatory remarks and comments made by the Accused made by him against the Complainant. The accused received the notice and has sent a reply notice dated 03.11.2018.

22. In his reply notice the accused denied all the factual imputations raised against him. It was alleged by the accused in his reply notice that the complainant herein, under the garb of freedom and expression of speech has sought to abuse the Prime Minister of India. The accused also defended his tweet that “the complainant is an accused in a murder case”, saying that it was not defamatory. The accused defended his acts in vain by saying that the people have a right to know the matters concerning the complainant especially matters those which affects the society as a whole since the complainant is a Member of Parliament and a Representative of the People . Instead of acting fairly in compliance to the Notice demands which are only Just and fair, the accused chose to stick to his malicious and ill conceived stand and vehemently tried to defend his illegal acts and words in vain. He also declined to tender the apology or to withdraw and delete the Tweet and Video clip and on the other hand required the complainant to withdraw the lawyer notice within 48 hours and to apologize to the accused.

23. In fact, a clear and impartial reading of the statements made by the complainant during his speech in the occasion of Bengaluru Literature Festival on last Sunday 28/10/2018, would reveal without leaving any room for doubts that the complainant was referring to an old news article published in the magazine ‘Caravan’ in the year 2012 named ‘The Emperor Uncrowned’ wherein the author of the article, journalist, Mr. Vinod Jose, has ended the article by quoting an unnamed source in the RSS that to them Mr. Narendra Modi is like a Scorpion sitting on a Shiv Linga. Referring to that old news and quoting the context, the complainant has opined that “There’s an extraordinarily striking metaphor expressed by an unnamed RSS source to the journalist Mr. Vinod K.Jose of ‘The Caravan’. The RSS source said Modi is like a Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Scorpion sitting on a Shiv Linga. You cannot remove him with your hand and you cannot hit it with a chappal either.”

24.The speech was done by the complainant during his introduction of the newly published literary work on Prime Minister Narendra Modi ‘The Paradoxical Prime Minister: Narendra Modi and his India’. The complainant was strictly adhering the context and topic under discussion. The accused was well aware that the complainant was just referring to the content of an old article which is documented and there in the public domain for nearly six years. The comment was not that of the complainant and he was plainly quoting a third person by clearly referring to the authorship of the quote. So it is evident that accused has intentionally misused the occasion and content of the complainant’s opinion expressed therein, in his culpable and malicious effort to malign and defame the complainant and to lower his esteem in the society.

25. That it is humbly stated that the Accused has committed an offence under Section 499 of the IPC as the Complainant has suffered humiliation and severe loss of reputation in the eyes of the public and he has baselessly been declared by the Accused that he is charge sheeted in a serious allegation of murder. Such malicious, unsubstantiated and reckless imputations have deeply hurt the public standing and reputation of the Complainant who has spent decades in public life and community service and thereby built an immense reputation for himself in the eyes of the public, which has been severely impaired by the acts of the Accused.

26. That a person’s reputation is an inseparable element of an individual’s personality and it cannot be allowed to be tarnished in the name of right to freedom of speech and expression because right to free speech does not mean right to offend. Rather, the object of guaranteeing constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression is to advance public debate and discourse. However, speech and writings laden with harmful intent or knowledge of causing harm or made with Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

reckless disregard is not entitled to the protection of Article 19(1) (a) since it does not serve any Constitutional purpose.

27. That the mental suffering caused to the Complainant cannot even be calculated in terms of money. The words published, the statements made and the video posted were made to cause and to bring the Complainant into hatred, contempt or ridicule and to diminish the good opinion that people at large have of him and, therefore, the Accused Person is liable to be punished for the offence of defamation. Even the duty cast on Accused Person in law or for public interest obligated the said Accused Person to ensure that any words or news published, spoken or telecast do not in any manner cast any doubt on Complainant’s self-esteem. The derogatory implication of the statement made and the video posted which to the knowledge of the Accused, would cause mental injury and would bring the Complainant in disrepute in the eyes of people at large. The above mentioned statements and the two minute sixteen seconds video posted in Twitter was with a deliberate attempt to malign the complainant and with the oblique motive of bringing down the goodwill, estimation and reputation which the complainant maintains among the Public and his followers. The accused knew very well that the imputations in the aforesaid statement are false and baseless. But the said statement and video were prepared, selected, edited and posted on Twitter was for public viewership, by the accused in furtherance of his intention to tarnish the image and lower the reputation of the complainant.

28. The Statements and video posted on 28/10/2018, in the Twitter account of the accused thereto are per se defamatory and the imputations raised in the Statement against the complainant are absolutely false and baseless. Due to the very nature of the allegations, it can be clearly inferred that the accused person himself had every reason to believe the contents of his statement to be untrue as he has very deep knowledge in the realm of law. The accused knew well that all the statements and allegations are untrue and highly defamatory against the complainant. Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

The accused very well understands that though initially an FIR was lodged for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC against unknown suspects , later the Police altered the charge of allegations to that of offences under sections 306 and 498 A of IPC. But the allegations intentionally made and published with malaﬁde object to tarnish the image of the complainant in front of the General Public. All the defamatory statements and video published by the accused was with the culpable intention to malign the image of the complainant and fully knowing that those are baseless and untrue and with a heinous intention to malign and lower the reputation of the complainant among the General Public. The accused, being an eminent lawyer and a designated Senior Advocate with the Supreme Court of India knew very well that whatever he has stated are incorrect and defamatory to the complainant. However those allegations were made maliciously and with ulterior motive to lower the credit and esteem of the complainant among the General Public.

29. By publishing and tweeting highly scandalous, false and defamatory imputations against the complainant, the accused have tarnished and harmed the reputation of the complainant. It has affected his reputation, goodwill and public image. The statements and video created an impression among the General Public that the complainant is a vile person who has murdered his wife and stands as an accused in the case of his wife’s murder and these untrue imputations has caused great harm to the reputation of the complainant. Pursuant to the tweeting of the statements and publishing the video, many well wishers of the complainant have contacted the complainant and enquired about the allegations and expressed their concern that the defamatory statement has been causing a dent in the good repute and clean image, which the complainant holds in the minds of public. This is especially true since the complainant is considered as an ideal and inspiration to millions of aspiring young Indians across the globe, who follow him keenly and admires him. The close friends and colleagues of the Complainant are contacting the Complainant and his family members on Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

a continuous basis and while informing them the contents of the aforesaid statements and video published in Twitter in his personal account by the accused, are expressing displeasure as regards the contents thereof. The said persons have also been informing the Complainant and his family that the said statement and video had been widely followed by the public at large, and the Complainant being commented and ridiculed upon whereby many members of the public have been expressing doubts on the innocence of the Complainant believing the statements made in the Twitter by the accused to be true. Since the date of these tweets and video, there has been a surge in various people dissecting and assassinating the character of the Complainant on numerous platforms and calling him all sorts of names. The Complainant has been receiving constant calls from various people since the dates of the such publication of statement in Twitter telling him about the hateful campaign being run against him in public forums and the vicious effect it is showing on the minds of the common man and also the minds of his known persons such as friends, associates, colleagues etc. The Complainant is in a complete state of emotional trauma since the outburst of these telecasts.

30. As a result of the publishing of statements and video in twitter on 28/10/2018, by the accused person, the image and good reputation which the complainant has scrupulously built up throughout his life, has been tarnished and thereby the acts of the accused have caused serious prejudice and irreparable injury to the complainant. The publication of the above defamatory imputations was with the full knowledge, active involvement, connivance and personal veriﬁcation by the accused, against the complainant, which has resulted in serious and irreparable injury and loss to the fame of the complainant which he earned in the course of his stellar career as a statesman and Political Leader. The acts of the accused are at best termed as reckless and irresponsible, which are diametrically opposed to the ethics and professional etiquettes which must have been shown by the accused who is none other than the Union Minister for Law and Justice and Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Electronics and Information Technology and an eminent lawyer himself, who is also a designated Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of India. The defamatory statements and video has attracted the scope of Section 499 IPC and none of the exceptions enumerated in Section 499 IPC are applicable in the facts of the present case. The acts of defamation committed by the Accused Person are not covered by any of the exceptions enumerated under Section 499 of IPC. The accused is an eminent leader of the ruling Bharatiya Janatha Party and a Union Minister for Law and Justice and Information Technology and he is followed in the Twitter by thousands of persons throughout India and at Thiruvananthapuram, where the ruling Bharatiya Janatha Party has a strong base and which is the complainant’s Parliamentary Constituency, among various other places spanning across the globe. In Thiruvananthapuram, the complainant resides within the jurisdictional area of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. Hence this Private Complaint is presented before this Honourable Court, within the territorial jurisdiction of which the Complainant has suffered defamation on account of the culpable offences committed by the accused and this Honourable Court has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

31. The above mentioned acts of the accused person constitute the commission of offence deﬁned under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, which is punishable under Sections 500 of Indian Penal Code. Hence it is most respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to receive the complaint on ﬁles and take cognizance of the matter and issue summons to the accused and proceed against him and try him for the above mentioned offences as per Law and award him with appropriate punishment as provided in the Law.

Dated this the day of , 2018.

Complainant : Dr. Shashi Tharoor

SURAJ KRISHNA B.S., Counsel for the Complainant

List of Documents: Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

1. True computer printout of the Twitter Page of the accused wherein the tweets were published and the video was uploaded on 28/10/2018 in his personal twitter handle ______, with link details.

2. The USB containing two minutes sixteen seconds video uploaded in the personal twitter handle of the accused ______on 28/10/2018, with link details.

Dated this the day of , 2018.

SURAJ KRISHNA B.S, Counsel for the Complainant Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Presented On: /12/2018

IN THE COURT OF THE

CHIEF JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

CMP No. ______OF 2018

Dr. Shashi Tharoor …

Complainant

Versus

Ravi Shankar Prasad … Accused

SURAJ KRISHNA B.S, Counsel for the Complainant