*Who will judge the Judges?* by *Aditi Kumaria Hingu*
*http://epaper.newindianexpress.com/1201501/The-New-Indian-Express-Chennai/10-05-2017#page/10/2
*The Republic of India has a federal government, comprising of the
Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. This structure is based on
the Constitution of India. The Constitution framed a system of governance
in which the powers conferred by the people are not vested in either a
single person or a single institution. Therein came the principle of
‘Separation of Powers’ among the three pillars of democracy – the
Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. *
*The Executive comprises the Prime Minister and his council of ministers
(the temporary executives) and the Civil Servants and other officers (the
permanent executives). They have the sole responsibility to ensure daily
administration of the nation/state. They propose policies, and once
approved, ensure that policies are implemented in a timely and effective
manner. *
*The Legislature comprises the Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha). It
is the policy making body of the country where all bills proposed by the
Executive get discussed, debated, amended, approved or rejected. *
*The Judiciary is the adjudicating body which is independent of the
Executive and Legislature. The bills proposed by the Executive and the laws
passed by the Legislature are subject to judicial review by the Supreme
Court of India. The Judiciary has the power to declare a law null and void
if it violates the constitution. *
*However it is a matter of national shame that the very Judiciary which is
tasked with ensuring that the Constitution is followed is now flouting its
principles on a regular basis with impunity. *
*Three recent judgements made by the Supreme Court of India come to mind –*
*In November 2016, the SC mandated that the National Anthem must be played
in all theatres prior to screening of movies. Neither was the ruling well
thought through, nor was it made clear as to how would this be enforced.
Movie-goers were confused whether they should stand up in case the National
Anthem is played as part of a movie. Physically disabled members of the
audience were assaulted for not standing up when the anthem was played. It
took clarifications and notifications from the Ministry of Home Affairs to
clear the air on this issue. The Honourable SC seemed to have forgotten
the fact that patriotism cannot be enforced. If at all, it does need to be
enforced, who will be the enforcing agency? Should the Indian Police Force,
which is under-staffed and over-worked, be asked to let go of their current
duties during movie times? *
*The second judgement was the April 2017 ban on all liquor vending outlets,
including Hotels and Restaurants, within 500 metres of National and State
Highways. If people drink and drive, accidents will happen. The source and
distance of liquor purchase is not a variable that impacts the casualty
rate. It will be worthwhile to monitor road accidents for the period of
April 2017 – March 2018 and compare it to the same period, a year ago.
There is very high probability that there will not any significant
reduction in the casualty rate. However there would be another metric that
would have dropped significantly – the rate of employment. It is estimated
that around 1 million jobs will get impacted in the hospitality industry
due to this law. Assuming an average family size of 5 members, this law
directly hits at the livelihood of 5 million people. Not only is this a
silly order, it is also a clear case of judicial overreach since the
prohibition of consumption of intoxicating drinks is a directive principle
which is under the aegis of the duly elected government.*
*Lastly and the most dangerous example of judicial overreach has been the
SC’s decision to reject the curative petition of the government and uphold
its earlier direction of 8th July 2016, wherein registration of FIR against
Armed Forces Personnel has been made mandatory for every encounter death.
This includes disturbed areas where Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA)
is in place. The Army and paramilitary forces are deployed in sensitive
areas due to the breakdown of civil machinery. Apart from helping maintain
order, they also serve a humanitarian role – hospitals in the Himalayan
region, the Goodwill schools in Ladakh, the roads maintained by Border
Roads Organisation are just a few examples. Yet, our Honourable judges
chose to paint the soldiers with the same brush as they would a common
criminal. No soldier wants to kill his own countrymen. But if there is a
threat to the country’s sovereignty, he will risk his all and fight. He
will either kill or get killed. Now, with this judgement passed by the SC
in its hallowed portals at New Delhi (far away from the harsh realities of
Siachen and Sukma), the soldiers have no option but to either let the
terrorists escape or get killed themselves. *
*It is indeed a sad day for the Republic of India when one of the pillars
of democracy, the Judiciary, itself becomes an enemy of the nation. Not
only does it break the norms established by the Constitution by its acts of
judicial overreach, it also harms the country’s freedom of expression,
economy and security. *
*The enormity of the Judiciary’s misplaced zeal becomes even more obvious
when one considers the abysmal track record of justice dispensation in
India. There are 30 million cases pending in India. Even if one assumes
that a case involves only two people, it is tantamount to 60 million people
waiting for justice. Despite these millions of people waiting for justice
related to criminal and civil matters – murders, rapes, criminal
intimidation, property disputes, cheating- the highest court in India,
decides to focus its energies on when the national anthem should be sung,
where should liquor not be dispensed and how should soldiers fight wars. If
this is not a mockery of justice, what is?*
*(Aditi Kumaria Hingu is a marketing graduate from IIM Calcutta, currently
she works in the corporate sector. She comes from an army background.)*
*f*
*http://epaper.newindianexpress.com/1201501/The-New-Indian-Express-Chennai/10-05-2017#page/10/2
*The Republic of India has a federal government, comprising of the
Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. This structure is based on
the Constitution of India. The Constitution framed a system of governance
in which the powers conferred by the people are not vested in either a
single person or a single institution. Therein came the principle of
‘Separation of Powers’ among the three pillars of democracy – the
Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. *
*The Executive comprises the Prime Minister and his council of ministers
(the temporary executives) and the Civil Servants and other officers (the
permanent executives). They have the sole responsibility to ensure daily
administration of the nation/state. They propose policies, and once
approved, ensure that policies are implemented in a timely and effective
manner. *
*The Legislature comprises the Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha). It
is the policy making body of the country where all bills proposed by the
Executive get discussed, debated, amended, approved or rejected. *
*The Judiciary is the adjudicating body which is independent of the
Executive and Legislature. The bills proposed by the Executive and the laws
passed by the Legislature are subject to judicial review by the Supreme
Court of India. The Judiciary has the power to declare a law null and void
if it violates the constitution. *
*However it is a matter of national shame that the very Judiciary which is
tasked with ensuring that the Constitution is followed is now flouting its
principles on a regular basis with impunity. *
*Three recent judgements made by the Supreme Court of India come to mind –*
*In November 2016, the SC mandated that the National Anthem must be played
in all theatres prior to screening of movies. Neither was the ruling well
thought through, nor was it made clear as to how would this be enforced.
Movie-goers were confused whether they should stand up in case the National
Anthem is played as part of a movie. Physically disabled members of the
audience were assaulted for not standing up when the anthem was played. It
took clarifications and notifications from the Ministry of Home Affairs to
clear the air on this issue. The Honourable SC seemed to have forgotten
the fact that patriotism cannot be enforced. If at all, it does need to be
enforced, who will be the enforcing agency? Should the Indian Police Force,
which is under-staffed and over-worked, be asked to let go of their current
duties during movie times? *
*The second judgement was the April 2017 ban on all liquor vending outlets,
including Hotels and Restaurants, within 500 metres of National and State
Highways. If people drink and drive, accidents will happen. The source and
distance of liquor purchase is not a variable that impacts the casualty
rate. It will be worthwhile to monitor road accidents for the period of
April 2017 – March 2018 and compare it to the same period, a year ago.
There is very high probability that there will not any significant
reduction in the casualty rate. However there would be another metric that
would have dropped significantly – the rate of employment. It is estimated
that around 1 million jobs will get impacted in the hospitality industry
due to this law. Assuming an average family size of 5 members, this law
directly hits at the livelihood of 5 million people. Not only is this a
silly order, it is also a clear case of judicial overreach since the
prohibition of consumption of intoxicating drinks is a directive principle
which is under the aegis of the duly elected government.*
*Lastly and the most dangerous example of judicial overreach has been the
SC’s decision to reject the curative petition of the government and uphold
its earlier direction of 8th July 2016, wherein registration of FIR against
Armed Forces Personnel has been made mandatory for every encounter death.
This includes disturbed areas where Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA)
is in place. The Army and paramilitary forces are deployed in sensitive
areas due to the breakdown of civil machinery. Apart from helping maintain
order, they also serve a humanitarian role – hospitals in the Himalayan
region, the Goodwill schools in Ladakh, the roads maintained by Border
Roads Organisation are just a few examples. Yet, our Honourable judges
chose to paint the soldiers with the same brush as they would a common
criminal. No soldier wants to kill his own countrymen. But if there is a
threat to the country’s sovereignty, he will risk his all and fight. He
will either kill or get killed. Now, with this judgement passed by the SC
in its hallowed portals at New Delhi (far away from the harsh realities of
Siachen and Sukma), the soldiers have no option but to either let the
terrorists escape or get killed themselves. *
*It is indeed a sad day for the Republic of India when one of the pillars
of democracy, the Judiciary, itself becomes an enemy of the nation. Not
only does it break the norms established by the Constitution by its acts of
judicial overreach, it also harms the country’s freedom of expression,
economy and security. *
*The enormity of the Judiciary’s misplaced zeal becomes even more obvious
when one considers the abysmal track record of justice dispensation in
India. There are 30 million cases pending in India. Even if one assumes
that a case involves only two people, it is tantamount to 60 million people
waiting for justice. Despite these millions of people waiting for justice
related to criminal and civil matters – murders, rapes, criminal
intimidation, property disputes, cheating- the highest court in India,
decides to focus its energies on when the national anthem should be sung,
where should liquor not be dispensed and how should soldiers fight wars. If
this is not a mockery of justice, what is?*
*(Aditi Kumaria Hingu is a marketing graduate from IIM Calcutta, currently
she works in the corporate sector. She comes from an army background.)*
*f*
GO
TO -- HOME PAGE - LIST OF
ARTICLES - INDEX
TO SIGS PRVR
No comments:
Post a Comment