Article 124(2) and Article 200 did not have words now imported into them by the Supreme Court. “Consultation” has already become “concurrence” and now appointment could be “deemed”.
Supreme Court can't become a parallel legislative body. But that's exactly what the court is doing by ordering for a committee with CJI on it to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner.
Addressing the All India Presiding Officers’ Conference at Kevadia, Gujarat, Naidu said the actions have resulted in 'avoidable blurring of contours demarcated by the Constitution'.
On 29 May 1951, Jawaharlal Nehru defended adding 'reasonable restrictions' to Article 19, arguing that free speech must be balanced with national security and unity.
This is the game every nation is now learning to play. Some are finding new allies or seeing value among nations where they’d seen marginal interest. The starkest example is India & Europe.
If this is about the Supreme Court’s recent recommendation regarding bills pending before the Governor and President, then can it be any different from the hollow arguments that ThePrint has published earlier?
Need I really venture further, and struggle through what is likely to be a dense legalistic moat of steaming outrage, putrefying prejudices, and eddying interpretations?
I will spare myself that. I will even concedingly assume that the author might have dredged up some valid points.
But, so what?
In the larger scheme of things, and the current priority of issues, can observations that come from whimsically selective, dubiously-intented, exaggerated punticiliousness be worthy of public thought…anytime soon?
We have State Govts, with obvious approval of the ruling party and its Central Govt., daily enforcing their own formulation of law & order, which is medieval, mob-driven, and barbaric.
Their actions unsparingly violate our constitution, and its enshrined ideals of human rights and justice. The ruling dispensation and its affliates brazenly and ceaselessly defy contitutional principles, and Court orders.
There are no legal ambiguities or uncertainities that exist which explain or excuse the regularly occuring lynchings, house demolitions, mob violence.
Mr. Mishra seems to have painstakingly done a finecombing of a few judicial pronouncements. Pray, how does their impact rank when compared to the brazen threats, calls for violent action, and ugly pronouncements that are regularly made in public by persons in high public office, like Mr. Yogi Adityanath? And even Mr. Amit Shah and Mr. Modi?
What accountability does the Govt. grant for its own actions?
Those in power and their acolytes are the very rogue group among us which is setting fire to the constitution.
———————–
I caught sight of the last paragraph.
The affected wail by Mr. Mishra, a former senior govt. bureaucrat, which simplistically attributes the backlog of courts cases to the Supreme Court, reveals the contempt held for the intelligence of the common citizen.
As if the Govt., the investigating bodies, the public prosecutors, the quick-to-litigate bureaucracy, the corruption spread all across, etc., have had no role to play in the creation of the mess.
———————–
I’ve only read the title of the article.
If this is about the Supreme Court’s recent recommendation regarding bills pending before the Governor and President, then can it be any different from the hollow arguments that ThePrint has published earlier?
Need I really venture further, and struggle through what is likely to be a dense legalistic moat of steaming outrage, putrefying prejudices, and eddying interpretations?
I will spare myself that. I will even concedingly assume that the author might have dredged up some valid points.
But, so what?
In the larger scheme of things, and the current priority of issues, can observations that come from whimsically selective, dubiously-intented, exaggerated punticiliousness be worthy of public thought…anytime soon?
We have State Govts, with obvious approval of the ruling party and its Central Govt., daily enforcing their own formulation of law & order, which is medieval, mob-driven, and barbaric.
Their actions unsparingly violate our constitution, and its enshrined ideals of human rights and justice. The ruling dispensation and its affliates brazenly and ceaselessly defy contitutional principles, and Court orders.
There are no legal ambiguities or uncertainities that exist which explain or excuse the regularly occuring lynchings, house demolitions, mob violence.
Mr. Mishra seems to have painstakingly done a finecombing of a few judicial pronouncements. Pray, how does their impact rank when compared to the brazen threats, calls for violent action, and ugly pronouncements that are regularly made in public by persons in high public office, like Mr. Yogi Adityanath? And even Mr. Amit Shah and Mr. Modi?
What accountability does the Govt. grant for its own actions?
Those in power and their acolytes are the very rogue group among us which is setting fire to the constitution.
———————–
I caught sight of the last paragraph.
The affected wail by Mr. Mishra, a former senior govt. bureaucrat, which simplistically attributes the backlog of courts cases to the Supreme Court, reveals the contempt held for the intelligence of the common citizen.
As if the Govt., the investigating bodies, the public prosecutors, the quick-to-litigate bureaucracy, the corruption spread all across, etc., have had no role to play in the creation of the mess.
———————–