Supreme Court’s unequivocal reiteration that there are limits to the government’s powers to restrict internet services is a belated but crucial reminder. The court’s norms should discourage misuse of state power in the name of security. This also redeems some of the moral and constitutional stature the court had lost.
Political challenge to Modi-Shah over CAA and NRC lacks energy
It comes as no surprise that the mercurial street fighter West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee rebuffed the Congress-Left attempt to forge a joint opposition front against the BJP over CAA-NRC. Protests across India may appear formidable, but still lack political energy to pose a threat to Modi and Amit Shah.
It seems premature to say that SC has redeemed its constitionnal stature. His behavior during the past year, and especially during the elections, his dumbfounding silence on everything that has happened lately raises questions about his future, his credibility and especially his independence. The SC has, according to the Constitution, a real judicial power. This judicial power is very silent, and the argument that it takes time to deliver justice challenges when the fundamental principles of the Constitution are at stake. But perhaps the country’s constitutional experts and citizens should ask themselves if the SC should not be given other means of action, allowing it to decide before legislative measures which infringe the Constitution are promulgated. .
Rahul Gandhi is an Everest sized roadblock to the Opposition getting back into the game. For all their political experience and attainments, personages like Mamata Banerjee and Sharad Pawar are restricted to one state. The Congress has a natural leadership role at the national level, now buttressed by the growing number of states in which it is in power. 2. The protests are spontaneous, might appear a little inchoate. However, they represent a rippling energy and emotion an emaciated opposition, hit out of the park as recently as in May last year, can only dream of. Drawing political mileage out of this changed mood is the natural right of the opposition in a democracy. 3. Whatever the state of the opposition, it is for the incumbent to figure why the glacier has begun to melt so swiftly.
Today’s judgment, which many, including me, feel does not go far enough, shows just how much moral authority – apart from formal legal powers under the Constitution – the apex court possesses. On Kashmir, possibly CAA as well, it has been a little behind the curve. Allowing an impression to form that, if push comes to shove, it will yield to the executive.
The judgment appears to have the character of an advisory opinion … Last few words of the Hindu’s edit. 2. Justice Arijit Pasayat of the apex court was once asked what his opinion was on a particular issue. Since the day I became a judge, he replied, I don’t express any opinions. I pass orders. 3. There is an immense store of information tucked away in my mind, to be retrieved and used to make a point.