Did Supreme Court exceed its limit?
Although this Indian Voter wants to keep her focus away from Jharkand, quite a lot seems to be happening there that warrants some discussion in these columns.
We knew quite well how Governor Razi made a mockery of electoral mandate by inviting Shibu Shoren to form the Government, knowing fully well that he didn't enjoy the majority. We also knew how the independents were traded and NDA managed to 'buy' their support.
As soon as Governor Razi committed the 'mother of all constitutional blunders', NDA leadership not wanting to take any chance started knocking at all the doors. The first door it knocked was the Rashtrapathi Bhavan. It got what it wanted as it was able to parade its flock before His Excellency and also he summoned the Governor and gave what could have been a severe dressing down.
The next door the NDA knocked was the Supreme Court. Supreme Court was in an unenviable position of having to walk a delicate line in its ruling as the issue involved a State Governor and the State legislature. The Court had to be careful not to step out of its jurisdiction and encroach on the legislative & executive prerogatives. Passing its ruling on Wednesday, SC came down heavily on Governor Razi and the UPA government in the State. Not only that, the highest court of the land advanced the confidence vote by five days, stayed the nomination of Anglo-Indian representative, directed the police to protect the legislators and ordered the installation of video cameras to ensure that the proceedings are fair. A part of the ruling that didn't get highlighted is that the Court did not encourage the demand for external observers, thus not tutoring the legislature on how to conduct the business.
The Supreme Court ruling expectedly did open the floodgates on the debate about the rights of legislature & judiciary. Unfortunately, the person who gave some legitimacy to the debate happens to be the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Somnath Chatterjee. He not only made a veiled criticism of the Apex Court but also called an all party meeting to discuss the issue. His concern about the so-called infringement of rights of the legislature lacks depth as this very same man lauded the SC when it intervened and passed a similar ruling two years ago in the Best Bakery Case. At that time, the government in question was Narendra Modi led BJP government. This time, the government in question is his friend Shibu Shoren's UPA government.
Even forgetting about the Left and Somnath Chatterjee for a moment and thinking about it neutrally, one is left to feel that the SC has done the right thing. When checks and balances available to the executive and legislature are made defunct by those in charge of the very same institutions by placing the party interests over the well-established democratic norms, somebody has to step in and in this case, it happens to be Supreme Court. It is not to be said that Somnath Chatterjee's concerns about the judgement are totally invalid. Simply put, he is barking at the wrong tree. This situation would not have arisen if the Governor had not acted in a parisan manner. Still, the situation could have been averted if the Centre had either advised the President to direct the Governor appropriately or have made Shibu Shoren resign. When neither of this happened, it is left to the SC to pass such an unprecedented ruling. After all this, the citizens of this country have reasons to be proud. Had this happened in any other country, the Court would not have intervened at all. But the army would have. That is the spirit of Indian democracy.
Post Script: While I type this at 1 am on Saturday, here comes the news about Soren's resignation egged on by the Centre and the Governor's decision to invite Arjun Munda (what a surname!) to form the government.
We knew quite well how Governor Razi made a mockery of electoral mandate by inviting Shibu Shoren to form the Government, knowing fully well that he didn't enjoy the majority. We also knew how the independents were traded and NDA managed to 'buy' their support.
As soon as Governor Razi committed the 'mother of all constitutional blunders', NDA leadership not wanting to take any chance started knocking at all the doors. The first door it knocked was the Rashtrapathi Bhavan. It got what it wanted as it was able to parade its flock before His Excellency and also he summoned the Governor and gave what could have been a severe dressing down.
The next door the NDA knocked was the Supreme Court. Supreme Court was in an unenviable position of having to walk a delicate line in its ruling as the issue involved a State Governor and the State legislature. The Court had to be careful not to step out of its jurisdiction and encroach on the legislative & executive prerogatives. Passing its ruling on Wednesday, SC came down heavily on Governor Razi and the UPA government in the State. Not only that, the highest court of the land advanced the confidence vote by five days, stayed the nomination of Anglo-Indian representative, directed the police to protect the legislators and ordered the installation of video cameras to ensure that the proceedings are fair. A part of the ruling that didn't get highlighted is that the Court did not encourage the demand for external observers, thus not tutoring the legislature on how to conduct the business.
The Supreme Court ruling expectedly did open the floodgates on the debate about the rights of legislature & judiciary. Unfortunately, the person who gave some legitimacy to the debate happens to be the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Somnath Chatterjee. He not only made a veiled criticism of the Apex Court but also called an all party meeting to discuss the issue. His concern about the so-called infringement of rights of the legislature lacks depth as this very same man lauded the SC when it intervened and passed a similar ruling two years ago in the Best Bakery Case. At that time, the government in question was Narendra Modi led BJP government. This time, the government in question is his friend Shibu Shoren's UPA government.
Even forgetting about the Left and Somnath Chatterjee for a moment and thinking about it neutrally, one is left to feel that the SC has done the right thing. When checks and balances available to the executive and legislature are made defunct by those in charge of the very same institutions by placing the party interests over the well-established democratic norms, somebody has to step in and in this case, it happens to be Supreme Court. It is not to be said that Somnath Chatterjee's concerns about the judgement are totally invalid. Simply put, he is barking at the wrong tree. This situation would not have arisen if the Governor had not acted in a parisan manner. Still, the situation could have been averted if the Centre had either advised the President to direct the Governor appropriately or have made Shibu Shoren resign. When neither of this happened, it is left to the SC to pass such an unprecedented ruling. After all this, the citizens of this country have reasons to be proud. Had this happened in any other country, the Court would not have intervened at all. But the army would have. That is the spirit of Indian democracy.
Post Script: While I type this at 1 am on Saturday, here comes the news about Soren's resignation egged on by the Centre and the Governor's decision to invite Arjun Munda (what a surname!) to form the government.
posted by Indian Voter at 4:06:00 AM
11 Comments:
Its a very fine line when it comes to court Vs legislature. The centre needn't obey on all the orders, but they respect the courts, atleast till now. as you said, this situation would not have arised if the center had demanded for a resignation even before the case was filed.
even if it is outside the jurisdiction, I would still like to see the SC to violate them for the betterment of the country.
Now add another person to the list of people who listen to their inner voice - Shibu Soren. I dont get that phrase anyway - What does the rest of the homo sapien species listen to??
If you recall, some editorials (notably the telegraph) denounced the parading of 41 NDA mla s before the President saying the President has overstepped his limits by letting this happen.
The politicians have been subdued or did not even bother about and now the court has gone a step further. The last time the court's judgement was not listened to/ adhered was the Karnataka Govt headed by the Congress in the cauvery issue. Even then, the politicians have been careful and have stepped back and the court does not pronounce harsh things after that. It happened so the last time and I expect it to happen on Monday when the Court reconvenes.
This was surely an interesting post on an interesting matter. Unfortunately I seem to have missed most of the fun without having access to decent news media.
To my unlearnt eyes, just by the look of it there is merit to the debate about the rights and jurisdiction. Indian constitution surely has some interesting things to say about the powers of Governer.
Check out
ConstitutionEspecially Part IV.
To me it seems Governer does have the rights to invite whoever he sees fit to form the government and set up a date to prove the majority. Is it necessary for the Governer to do the head count in person or go by the newspaper reports or just take the words of the leaders? Given the person could not prove the majority, will not the next chance go to the opposing alliance for proving the majority? Also going by your previous post, if Ekka (?) is the only one person who could seal the fate of the government, and if he represents a constituency that will least support an NDA government, isn't Governer's decision the logical one? (I might be just plain wrong on facts. Let me again blame it on the lack of credible information I can access!) Didn't we have such invitations to form governments before? NTR's first government had to endure that, I guess! For that matter how exactly our President decides on whom to invite to form the government at centre in our ever more complex Alliances (19+ in UPA)?
Now coming to the argument against Somnath Chatterjee. Again, I suspect the two incidents in comparison are totally different. If I am right, the best bakery case was more of an executive failure to uphold the law. The directive principles of the state policy in our constitution may be what mattered then. The current issue is more related to the interpretation of constitution involving another branch of the government. So Mr. Chatterjee may have a point to make as he is surely one of the respected parliamentarians in our country.
Let me repeat, I am neither a constitutional expert nor followed up the developments in detail. So these are just my vague views. Though the summary you provide gives some precise information, it might be helpful if you can give some links to the relevant news items in your posts.
Hello Anonymous
Are you the same person who left a comment for my previous post on Sonia?
Anyways, first my thanks to you for providing the link on Constitution. Learnt so many things today through that.
Since you hadn't followed the events then & there w.r.t this episode, it appears to you that the Governor is technically right. You are right when you say that the Governor should not go by the head count or by the media reports. But in this case, Shibu Shoren led UPA was neither the largest pre-poll alliance nor did it have the single largest party in its ranks. Coz of the lack of numbers, it is tyhe Independents who hold the key. Assuming that the Independents could swing either way, either the Governor must invite the largest pre-poll combination (We have a precedence here for this. Dr Shankar Dayal Sharma invited Vajpayee in 1996 based on the same logic. Remember the 13 day BJP govt?) or the single largest party (again, BJP). If the Governor might have thought that the Independents (esp. Enos Ekka) would support UPA, he didn't bother to have a word with them. Moreover, the hurry with which he sworn in Shoren leaves no doubt about his role in this shame. Do read this post of mine where I have covered the events in detail.
About Somnath Chatterjee, if I remember right, the Gujarat Legislature decided to drop the case and the SC pulled it up for that. Again, it criticised the legislature for some reason and our Somnathji expressed profound happiness. I don't remember the events precisely. So, let me give the benefit of doubt to Chatterjee.
But Chatterjee does have a point. It doesn't augur well for the country if legislature & judiciary crossed swords. But this particular case is exceptional. When the Governor commits a blunder and the Centre is either party to it or prefers to be a blind observer, the Court has to step in. If it happens on a regular basis, as Somnath feels a Presidential reference might be needed.
rgds,
Indian Voter
Saranyan - Well said.. that is precisely my point as well.
Harish -
>> What does the rest of the homo sapien species listen to?? - An audio player, perhaps?? :P
Unfortunately, most of the media in India are biased. Take the case of TN. It is a common knowledge that number of people in the State who listen to the TV news are more in number than those who get the news through newspapers. Currently, the airwaves are dominated by Sun TV & Jaya TV, both of which would always present an extremely diametric view about anything on the earth. There is a strong need for a neutral media in India more than ever.
As for the Karnataka govt on Cauvery issue, I still wonder why the Courts didn't bother to do anything beyond making SM Krishna apologise. Doesn't it set a bad precedent - that you cd violate the court's order anytime and just apologise? My knowledge on law is very limited.
I was eagerly looking fwd to Monday. But then, the situation in the ground has undergone a sea change now.
As you mentioned, SC doesnt go beyond that. It kinda errrr stops after making its point. I am assuming thats what would happen tommorrow.
As for Jaya TV and Sun TV, I heard that the Kanchi episode brought them together.
I happened to read this on the Hindu Magazine today. Put up a link on my blog too.. nothing to do with politics but very very interesting... http://www.hindu.com/mag/2005/03/13/stories/2005031300500300.htm
I had not read your previous post about Jharkhand as I started reading your blog from the post on Jaya! Thanks. Surely your previous post gives more details of the events.
Well, my reservations still persist. There is an increasing trend in our citizens for taking courts as the only place to set the system right. Atleast few of your readers also think so! While Supreme Court is the ultimate body on all constitutional matters, I believe we should examine whether there is a merit and absolute necessity in seeking courts' directive in each and every instance. Seeking judicial interference frequently on unwarrented situations, like the current one, may not help in strengthening the democracy, contrary to the popular belief. Apart from the danger of encouraging judicial activism further down in our future, will it not also lead to an unhealthy relation between these two arms of the government whereby each seeking to weaken the other? Well, Saranyan has answered this question inadvertently in his comment. That the parliament 'ATLEAST TILL NOW' heeds to the courts' directives. Believing that the risk of parliament ignoring courts is less to how courts can set things right, is a naive notion about democracy. That infact is something which can shake the pillars of our democracy. The strength of the Indian democracy so far was this deep understanding of how these arms should work independently without trampling on others' rights. Luckily, perhaps in a much fairer way than many of our neighbours! And that is what should be preserved for a stronger nation.
Situations like this are not as big to take such risks. Like I said in my earlier comment, the system itself was good enough to get this issue sorted out without a judicial intervention. I still think that the Governer has the discretion to invite whomever he seems fit to form a government. Think again, if NDA has the real majority (without coercion), they should be least worried about whoever be called by the Governer to form the government. The system prescribes a way to beat the malice by the vote in the legislative assembley. So be it. Next to think of is the precedence. Precedences are only guiding arms. There are occassions where a precedence can be ignored, I would believe. Say the Governer is privy to some information that shows attempts to fail the essence of our democracy. Say again buying votes could be such an information. So there is no 'Dharma Yudh' on either side of this war. So I would believe the governer still remains as the most informed person to make a choice, though again I may not be able to comment on the way or the haste the Governer has chosen in this particular instance. But in principle, I guess, he can defend his position.
In short, there is no easy way to a functioning democracy. Believe it, least by frequent judicial interventions! However, I strongly believe that this incident may only help our democracy at the end, by the debate and the understanding it will generate on the aftermath. Perhaps what we citizens should do is to learn lessons from it rather than being emotive about the whole incident.
Well, as a last note, I can confess that I am the same 'annoying mouse' gnawing on your posts since your post about Jaya. Sorry for being anonymous, but I believe not having a face is better to have an active discussion and also as I am an aspiring(!) blogger-to-be (with an apparent severe lack of escape velocity!) I wanted to test the path before shooting off with my blog. As I am not yet decided on the matters I wish to cover in my blog I was on the lookout for good blogs around, when I stumbled on your blog from another blog. I liked your blog as here I can read about politics without weeding through a lot of personal trivia and to your credit you surely give a fair and balanced commentary to an extent.
(Sometimes, when I write such long comments I wish I had started writing my blog instead as I could have written more in detail! Well, I need more fuel first, I guess.)
Hi Indian Voter,
What rights did our Honourable Speaker mention, that Supreme court is infringing? Is it right to violate the Constitution or the right to blatant and vulgar abuse of power that was going on at Jharkand.
He is the biggest fool to have called for separation of Judiciary and Legislature. They are like fruits and leaves of a tree and cannot survive without each other. If Legislature is the administrative machinery of the country, then Judiciary is the Law enforcing machinery of the country. The Speaker should know that the functioning of the Legislature is also guided by the Constitution and Laws. Who is to correct them if they violate those laws. Does the Speaker want to take the Legislature, already filled with sufficient Law offenders, above all laws.
It is the legislature which enacts laws to prescribe guidelines within which it can administrate and Judiciary enforces those guidelines to monitor that Legislature and its sub-branches administrates within the prescribed legal boundaries. If Judiciary should not interfere in Legislature, then Legislature should not enact laws. Then the situation will arise where Judiciary will enact laws but would not be able to enforce it and Legislature needs to administrate the country but there would not be any guidelines or legal structure within which to do so. It is as if suggesting that brain and body function independently. Only Somnath Chatterjee can do that.
As expected, the SC walked away!
Hari, I dont think Somnath is a fool. I would agree if you call him a cheap politician (redundant adj, I know) coz thats what he is.
Do you really beleive if it had been BJP government that was invited by a RSS governor, and Congress goes to court - BJP would have been silent ??
Without sounding cynical - Everyone plays politics. The sad fact is that the judiciary unwittingly has become a player, thanks to the politics played by a stupid governor.
Hi Harish,
I fully agree with you. but I was only referring to the call for separation of Judiciary from legislature and that call this time was made by Somnath Chatterjee, irrespective of whose prompting he did it. Yes tomorrow even BJP would react the same way, I agree.
Hi IV,
New post in my blog.
Post a Comment
<< Home