New Delhi: A writ petition has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking implementation of an e-petitioning system in India where citizens can directly petition the Parliament on matters of public importance.
“The said framework will usher in an era of constitutional dialogue by which citizens can seek the initiation of debate and discussion on important national matters,” said the petition filed in December 2022.
It proposes that the central government takes steps to ensure that a citizen’s voice is heard in Parliament without facing undue barriers, enabling a discussion on topics of public importance.
The writ, filed by one Karan Garg, an IIT Roorkee & Kellogg School of Management graduate, says that he feels disempowered, powerless and voiceless when it comes to the democratic process.
Through the proposed nuanced framework, a citizen can prepare a petition, seek popular support, and upon crossing a minimum threshold, the petition must be taken up for debate in Parliament.
The writ comes at a time when the Parliament is seeking to assert itself as the architect of the Constitution.
Recently, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, reportedly said in the Rajya Sabha, “I assure the House that there is no authority beyond Parliament to scrutinise our actions. I further assure the House that there is a constitutional prescription to that level. I indicated so on 7 December 2022, I reiterate, we are the ultimate architects of the Constitution. There is no authority under the Constitution that can even look at issues that are meant for us.”
Also read: ‘No overt act or participation’ — why court discharged Sharjeel Imam, 10 others in 2019 Jamia case
Proposed model
Garg said that the government should create an online platform under the purview of a committee. When a citizen has a concern of public importance, the platform can be used to create a citizen petition.
One must then gather support and acceptance by a minimum number of citizens to be considered for submission before Parliament. “As would be deemed appropriate by the Committee on Petitions, a minimum number of approved signatures shall be required for the petition to be put for consideration,” says the petition.
Once the petition meets this requirement of minimum signatures, it will be converted into a public petition and made available for public consideration. It must then get higher support from the public to merit a reply from the concerned ministry or government department.
No scope for democratic participation
It is Garg’s case that once citizens cast their votes, there is no scope for any democratic participation. There is a ‘complete absence’ of a formal mechanism for citizen engagement with lawmakers, creating a void between the elected representatives and citizens.
“This distancing of the citizens to their inherent rights to fully participate in Indian democracy is a matter of grave concern and is an issue, which needs to be immediately addressed,” reads the petition.
Garg said in the petition that the present system does not allow citizens to adequately voice their concerns on matters of national and international importance.
There are only 543 lawmakers for over 130 crore Indians, meaning that about 24 lakh citizens are represented by one lawmaker, he said.
“It is submitted that it is paramount that the respondent takes concrete steps in order to ensure that citizens can engage with the lawmakers at a deep level and are empowered to take steps to initiate discussions in Parliament on issues concerning the rights and future of the citizens,” said the petition.
Such a proposal, if implemented, will increase engagement and decrease burden on the judiciary as well. This would also further the system of checks and balances found within the Constitution.
The petition also referred to the Supreme Court’s very own creation, epistolary jurisdiction, where the top court allows letters addressed to it to be converted into petitions.
Working successfully in UK, Australia
The system of citizens petitioning the Parliament directly is not new and has been working in the United Kingdom and Australia for many years, said Garg.
In the United Kingdom, the petitions website allows members of the public to create and support petitions for consideration by the UK House of Commons. Open to British citizens and UK residents, one must create a petition and get a minimum of five members to support the same.
The petition committee then reviews all such petitions for minimum requirements, and after being made available to the public, it merits a reply from the government or discussion in the Parliament based on the number of signatures.
Such a system would not require enactment of major laws and mere well-reasoned regulations would be enough to make such a system effective in India, he said.
“There is as such no difficulty in implementing the same system in India,” said the writ.
What prompted the plea
Garg’s son and brother suffer from cerebral palsy, a group of disorders that affect movement and muscle tone or posture. They had considerable struggle growing up.
However, when Garg approached his MP with suggestions to make life better for disabled people, there was a ‘complete cold shudder’. He felt the need to be able to approach Parliament directly to raise his suggestions so that disabled people ‘feel a part of the mainstream’, read the petition.
In March 2022, Garg had submitted the proposal for the system to the concerned authorities, including the office of the Prime Minister and Speakers of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
“My upbringing and my years in IIT have taught me to hold my country and my flag in high regard, making me conscious of my responsibility to become a responsible citizen and my duty to the society in which I live,” read his letter from 2022.
“Presently, while working in India, I am able to clearly identify why I, as an ordinary citizen, feel disempowered in my own system, and why my belief in our country’s democratic institutions is on a shaky ground,” he added.
Garg’s letter was subsequently forwarded by the PMO to the Secretary of Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs for consideration. However, despite submitting a follow-up on the central government’s Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS), he did not get any reply from the government.
The Supreme Court has not issued notice in the matter, but asked Garg to supply a copy to the Parliamentary Secretary.
(Edited by Smriti Sinha)
Also read: Madras High Court making khula valid isn’t enough without codifying Muslim personal law