Govt's AI defence after Supreme Court flags Sonam Wangchuk speech translation

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Sonam Wangchuk, argued the speech was the "most proximate event" to Sonam Wangchuk's detention but the authorities had relied on what he described as incorrect translations.

The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the Centre over discrepancies in the translated speeches used to detain climate activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act, with the government responding that the exercise had been carried out by a department and, in today’s age, artificial intelligence was believed to be highly accurate.

The bench said the least it expected was a correct translation, noting that the version placed on record appeared far longer and materially different from what Wangchuk had actually said, which, according to his counsel, was limited to condemning violence.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Wangchuk, argued that the government had failed to respond to key objections raised earlier, especially regarding a speech delivered during an hunger strike on September 24 — two days before the activist was detained.

Sibal said the speech was the “most proximate event” to the detention but the authorities had relied on what he described as incorrect translations. Reading from the material, he asked the bench, “Where has he said anything about overthrowing any government?”

Justice Aravind Kumar, part of the Supreme Court bench, pointed out that some of the allegations did not even find mention in the detention order.

The court then told the Centre in strong words: “There should be at least the correct translation of what he said. That is the least we expect. Your translation is of seven-eight minutes and his speech is simply for three minutes saying I condemn this, let’s stop this. That’s it.”