‘You are bound by that judgement’
Fali Nariman Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar The focus was also on Sharath, who questioned the principle of hierarchy of the constitution. Nariman, without naming the Vice President, said that the framework of the Constitution was in place, and “Thank God it will happen.” On the Centre’s “sitting down” on better names by the collegium, he said it was “fatal for democracy”, and advised a deadline of 30 days for the government to respond, or face adoption as encroachment. were adopted in Nariman said, “We have heard criticism from the Law Minister in the process. I give the data to the Law Minister that today there are two basic structural principles of the Constitution for which he is best known. One is, at least five unelected judge.” We call it constitution. They are reliable to interpret the constitution. Once those five or more have interpreted the constitution, it is your duty as an authority under account 144 to follow that order. If you disagree then you can criticize it. As a citizen, I can criticize it, no problem, but never forget that I am a citizen today, you have a right and as a right you are bound by that decision. whether it is right or wrong.”
A ‘wrong precedent…’: Vice President
Let us tell you that the government appointment of judges The pressure is being built for a bigger role. Since 1993, the Supreme Court Collegium, or the panel of senior-most judges, appoints Supreme Court and High Court judges. Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar had also supported the Center questioning the Constitution’s principle of hierarchy and hinted that the judiciary should be aware of its apprehension. He called the repeal of the NJAC (National Communications Commission) Act a “serious compromise” of sovereignty. Dhankhar referred to the landmark 1973 Supreme Court judgment in the Kesavananda Bharti case as a classic example of the legislature versus judiciary debate. A ‘wrong example.’ Dhankhar had said, “A wrong precedent (wrong job) started in 1973. In the Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court gave the idea of basic structure, saying that Parliament can amend the Constitution, but not its basic structure.” ” In the Kesavananda Bharti case, the apex court had questioned the extent of constitutional amendment and concluded that the constitution of the Parliament can be amended, but its basic structure cannot be changed.
‘Will enter a new abyss’
Former Circuit Nariman said, “From the 1980s till date, this very important weapon in the hands of the judiciary has been used many times. Whenever the executive has tried to act beyond the constitution, the judiciary has done the work of checks and balances.” The last time it was used wrongly: The 99th Amendment was struck down, which was the National Employment Appointment Commission Act. In an apparent jibe at the Vice President, the former judge said the principle of the Constitution’s framework was invoked twice It was challenged. It has been challenged, and it has been destroyed both times. Then in 40 years “no one said a word” about it. “It’s a principle that needs to be changed twice,” Nariman said. An attempt was made, and that too 40 years ago. Since then, no one has said a word about it, but only recently. So we must be very clear that this is something that is always there. Envisioning a world without independent and fearless judges, Nariman reiterated his warning that if this changed, we would “enter the abyss of a dark age”. If you don’t have independent and fearless judges, say goodbye. Nothing is left. In fact, according to me, if in the end, this citadel falls down, or collapses, we shall enter a new abyss. A dark era in which the common man of Laxman (the late cartoonist RK Laxman) asked himself only one question – If the taste of salt is gone, where will the returns come from?”
‘All weak ends should be tied up’
Former Circuit Nariman said that ‘all loose ends should be tied up’ in the Memorandum of Procedure for prosecuting officers of the High Court. A five-judge bench should be constituted to cover all the relevant ends of the Memorandum of Procedure for the appointment of judges of the Supreme Court of India. “And that the constitution should lay down to the students, in my general opinion, once and for all that once the government is nominated by the collegium and if the government has nothing to say within a period of 30 days , then it will be assumed that he has nothing to say…’Sit on names’ is very deadly against democracy in this country.Government follows the standard that if this collegium has made up its mind then another collegium names can be sent. It happens all the time, because you are in continuous government. You go on for five years, but the collegiums that come have a shorter term. So this is a very important thing. If the central government In the name of the former Supreme Court judge who has behaved inappropriately while delivering a lecture at the Seventh Chief Justice MC Chagla Memorial on the topic “A Tale of Two Constitutions- India and the United States of America” in Mumbai and the Collegium reiterates the time limit Will be fixed. These sharp austerities.
Read this also-
“What happened to Gopinath…” went viral: Tharoor gave an interesting answer to Anand’s question
Synagogue shooting in East Jerusalem kills 7, suspects killed
“There Was No Security Breach”: Kashmir Police On Rahul Gandhi’s India Visit
Weather is going to change: possibility of strong wind, rain and hail from tomorrow