Source: How the judiciary maintains accountability, May 7, 2025, The Hindu
The Vice-President’s recent remarks questioning the role and accountability of the judiciary have raised concerns about constitutional balance and the principle of separation of powers. A closer look at these statements reveals inconsistencies with established constitutional norms, judicial interpretations, and the democratic framework rooted in popular sovereignty.
Vice-President’s Remarks and Their Impact
- Public Statement and Controversy: Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar’s remarks about the judiciary have sparked widespread concern. He criticised the Supreme Court for setting deadlines for the President and Governors to act on legislative Bills.
- Claims Made: He argued that judges were acting like a “super parliament,” stated that they cannot direct the President, and claimed that they are not accountable under the law. These statements require close constitutional scrutiny.
Need for Caution in Constitutional Speech
- Responsibility of High Office: As the second-highest constitutional authority, the Vice-President’s words carry significant influence. Remarks made without constitutional backing can mislead citizens and disrupt institutional harmony.
- Impact on Public Perception: Statements from such high offices can send confusing signals to the public, possibly undermining trust in democratic institutions.
Examining the “Super Parliament” Claim
- Parliament’s Supremacy: The term “super parliament” holds no place in constitutional language. Parliament is the highest legislative body, created by the will of the people and representing their sovereignty.
- Judiciary Within Limits: No institution, including the judiciary, can go beyond Parliament’s legislative role. Judicial powers are firmly rooted in the Constitution and bound by it.
Constitutional Boundaries on Judicial Powers
- Safeguards Against Arbitrary Use: To prevent judicial overreach, all powers of the judiciary are constitutionally defined. These limits protect the balance of power among the branches of government.
- Legal Precedent: In L. Chandra Kumar vs Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court held that while judicial authority lies within the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary is protected by the doctrine of separation of powers.
- Remedies for Overreach: If judges cross constitutional boundaries, it constitutes a violation of Article 50. Parliament may initiate removal proceedings in such cases.
The President’s Role and Powers
- Position in the Constitutional Framework: The President, as defined under Articles 52, 53, and 79, is the head of the State, Executive, and Parliament. His or her authority flows from constitutional provisions and is exercised within defined limits.
- Limits of Presidential Discretion: While the President has the power to give assent to Bills, this power must respect the principle of popular sovereignty. Delays in assent can obstruct democratic functioning.
Judicial Timeframes and Democracy
- Protecting Legislative Mandates: Setting a time frame for granting assent ensures that the decisions of elected legislatures are implemented without undue delay. This aligns with democratic values.
- Respecting Constitutional Roles: Judicial directions in this regard do not diminish the President’s status. They reinforce accountability within a constitutional framework.
Constitutional Supremacy Over All Authorities
- Obligation to Follow the Constitution: Every authority, including the President and Governors, is bound by the Constitution. No one is above its mandates, and all actions must be in line with its provisions.
- Preserving Democratic Order: Adherence to the Constitution ensures that the sovereignty of the people remains the foundation of governance.
Judicial Accountability Under the Law
- Invalidity of the Vice-President’s Claim: The suggestion that the law of the land does not apply to judges is constitutionally incorrect. Judges are fully accountable within the legal framework.
- Mechanism for Misconduct: If a judge violates constitutional limits, he or she can be removed for proved misbehaviour, which includes breaching constitutional norms.
Parliament’s Role in Law-Making and Oversight
- Corrective Legislative Power: Parliament has the authority to pass new laws to override judicial decisions, if necessary. This highlights the ultimate sovereignty of the people through their elected representatives.
- Democratic Balance: This mechanism ensures that the judiciary and Parliament function in balance, with each respecting the other’s constitutional role.
Judiciary’s Role in Upholding the Constitution
- Review and Protection of Rights: The judiciary has the responsibility to review State actions to maintain the rule of law and protect citizens’ rights.
- Power Under Article 142: Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to do complete justice in cases where no direct law applies. This makes the Court the final interpreter and guardian of the Constitution.
The Call for Constitutional Prudence
- Need for Restraint in Crisis: In challenging times, all constitutional authorities must act with restraint and uphold democratic values. Reckless statements can undermine constitutional faith.
- Safeguarding Democratic Spirit: Both citizens and officials must protect the Constitution by speaking and acting within its limits to preserve India’s democratic foundations.