Judicial Overreach- Supreme Meddling
- In Current Affairs
- 07:54 PM, Feb 05, 2016
- YagnaSri
The Supreme Court (SC) is now hearing notices to the Sabrimala Temple management to remove the restriction on women of a certain age group from entering the temple in a PIL filed by a leftist NGO. Other religious and cultural practices like Jallikattu are also under the scrutiny of SC. A relook on the legality of Section 377 of IPC which makes homosexuality illegal and punishable in India is also under way. It even held the sale of shares in some companies as illegal not too long ago.
It is well settled in law that Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a method devised by SC wherein the concerned citizens can agitate on behalf of the weak and vulnerable sections of the society and obtain justice and relief from the SC. For about two decades the SC had passed many orders which were hailed by many Indians. As the paralysis in executive and state assemblies grew, the involvement of the SC and High Courts in various issues increased. It is now legal for courts to take newspaper reports of PILs and start proceedings. Such law like PILs is not there in any other democracy.
As time passed, a vast army of professional activists mainly funded from abroad started using this PIL as a weapon to push their agenda. Most unfortunately, SC allowed them to be heard from time to time.
At absolutely no time, can any court interfere in the functioning of parliament or ask the government to make a law. But such instances are becoming a regular occurrence in our nation. There may be instances where the failure of the political leadership to properly manage the legislative and executive functions creates a vacuum into which courts may have to step in. This should be extremely rare and courts cannot be dragged into doing what executive can’t. The tendency of some activists to portray the courts as the sole saviour of people and the nation is also to be questioned. When the legislature and executive tried to take some of the powers which were taken by SC by enacting NJAC the SC instead of looking into its own conduct in judicial appointments held it as unconstitutional. This has almost sealed the path for consultation between executive and judiciary.
On many issues, it is surprising that the SC has not realised the futility of holding cultural and social practices as illegal without going into various reasons and issues involved with such practices. Seeking publicity by making all kinds of oral observations many times has resulted in sending a wrong message to the nation. Media, time and again by sensationalising such unwarranted oral remarks shows all the institutions of democracy in poor light.
There can be no doubt that judiciary should be and must be independent. But it also does not mean that it can have absolute say on appointments, keep important court cases pending or undecided, and decide on major policy matters like privatisation or disinvestment. This is not the mandate of the courts under Indian Constitution.
Many times the courts themselves failed to perform their intended duty. The petition filed against the infamous election of P.Chidambaram from Sivaganga Lok Sabha in 2009 was not decided during the 5-year term of the parliament by the Madras High Court. While SC heard and decided NJAC matter in few months, the division of Andhra Pradesh which created serious administrative problems to AP State is not seeing the light of the day. Ram Janamabhumi case is not being taken up even though the resolution of this issue will bring peace to the nation.
The failure to hear and adjudicate some very important and critical cases and apparent urgency shown to hear some cases wherein NGOs and activists are the petitioners shows certain serious inconsistency on the part of SC. It is no one’s case that SC should stop hearing any PILs. Large sections of people in our nation are still in serious poverty and need help from every quarter including from Supreme Court. But the manner in which some of the PILs are heard and decided wherein no such poor and vulnerable people are involved creates an impression that SC is being driven by, as Prime Minister Modi put it, as an agenda of 5-star activists.
A little bit of self-control and discipline may be urgently needed in Supreme Court before it irreparably damages its relations with people’s representatives and public at large.
Comments