logo
NJAC Act to Basic Structure doctrine, Jagdeep Dhankhar kept asking questions of the Supreme Court during his tenure

NJAC Act to Basic Structure doctrine, Jagdeep Dhankhar kept asking questions of the Supreme Court during his tenure

Indian Express22-07-2025
Jagdeep Dhankhar's term as Vice-President, cut short by his surprise resignation from the constitutional post late Monday evening, was marked by controversy as he spoke up against not just the Opposition but also the judiciary on multiple occasions. This followed his term as West Bengal Governor, where he had several run-ins with the Trinamool Congress (TMC) government.
In 2022, his term as the Rajya Sabha Chairman began on a controversial note during the Winter Session as he called the Supreme Court's 2015 judgment striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act a 'glaring instance' of 'severe compromise' of parliamentary sovereignty and disregard of the 'mandate of the people'. He said Parliament, being the custodian of the 'ordainment of the people', was duty-bound to 'address the issue' and expressed confidence that 'it will do so'. The remarks, made in the House on December 7, were a reiteration of what he had said a week earlier.
Dhankhar also said it was time for 'all constitutional institutions to reflect and give quietus to public display of adversarially challenging stance/trading or exchange of advisories emanating from these platforms'. The comments came at a time when the Opposition was planning to seek a discussion in the House on alleged government interference in the functioning of constitutional bodies, including a faceoff with the judiciary. A month earlier, then Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju had said the Collegium system of appointing judges was 'opaque' and 'not accountable' and 'alien' to the Constitution. His remarks had attracted the displeasure of the Supreme Court.
Comments on Basic Structure doctrine
A month later, on January 11, 2023, he rekindled the debate on the doctrine of separation of powers, citing the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 judgment in the Kesavananda Bharati case in which it ruled Parliament had the authority to amend the Constitution but not its basic structure. Dhankhar, in his inaugural address at the 83rd All-India Presiding Officers Conference in Jaipur, said it would be difficult to answer the question, 'Are we a democratic nation?'
'In a democratic society, the basic of any basic structure is supremacy of the people, sovereignty of the people, sovereignty of Parliament. Executive thrives on the sovereignty of Parliament. Legislatures and Parliament decide who will be the Chief Minister, who will be the Prime Minister. The ultimate power is with the Legislature. The Legislature decides who will be in other institutions. In such a situation, all Constitutional institutions – the Legislative, Executive, Judiciary – are required to be within their limits,' he said.
'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. With due respect to the Judiciary, I cannot subscribe to this,' Dhankhar said.
Reviving the NJAC debate
This March, amid the row over the discovery of wads of currency notes at the New Delhi home of High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, Dhankhar again revived the NJAC debate. He said 'things would have been different' if the Supreme Court had not struck down the mechanism for judicial appointments. His remarks on March 25 came on a day a three-member committee constituted by the Supreme Court began its inquiry into the conduct of Justice Varma and visited his residence.
The NJAC Act had proposed that appointment of judges be done by a six-member body, headed by the Chief Justice of India, and comprising two most senior SC judges, the Union Law Minister and two 'eminent' persons. The two eminent persons were to be selected by a panel comprising the Prime Minister, the CJI and the leader of the largest Opposition party in Lok Sabha.
However, the Supreme Court was of the view that there was no question of accepting an alternative procedure which did not ensure primacy of the judiciary in the matter of selection and appointment of judges in the higher judiciary.
On the judiciary and the President
On April 22, Dhankhar minced no words in questioning the judiciary soon after the Supreme Court imposed a three-month time limit on the President and governors to give their assent to a Bill. At a gathering at a Delhi University event to commemorate 75 years of the Constitution, Dhankhar said, 'There is no visualisation in the Constitution of any authority above Parliament … elected representatives … They are the ultimate masters as to what (the) Constitution content will be.'
Dhankhar also said that India cannot have a situation where the judiciary directs the President. 'So, we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super Parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because the law of the land does not apply to them,' he said the same day in his address to the sixth batch of the Rajya Sabha interns at the Vice President's Enclave.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Technology is powerful but cannot replicate human touch in justice delivery or legal aid: Justice Surya Kant
Technology is powerful but cannot replicate human touch in justice delivery or legal aid: Justice Surya Kant

The Hindu

time10 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Technology is powerful but cannot replicate human touch in justice delivery or legal aid: Justice Surya Kant

Supreme Court judge, Justice Surya Kant, said that though technology can make justice delivery systems and legal aid efficient, it cannot replace the human touch. 'Technology is only a tool. The heart of justice must remain human... In a world where machines write poetry and algorithms predict behaviour, we must remember: justice is still a human act. It is not rendered by bandwidth but by conscience. The greatness of the law lies not in authority, but in service; not in rigidity, but in compassion,' Justice Kant said. He was speaking on bridging the 'digital gap' and 'reimagining legal aid in the digital age for inclusive justice in India' at the Justice RC Lahoti Memorial Lecture on Saturday. His speech touched on significant statements regarding the limitations of technology in the field of law. Justice Kant is the Executive Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and in line for appointment as the next Chief Justice of India in November as per the seniority norm. The senior top court judge said the legal aid system cannot become a 'factory of canned responses'. 'Automated systems are efficient, but they cannot replace the human touch. Legal aid cannot become a factory of canned responses; it must not reduce people's problems to ticket numbers. There must always be a human fallback — someone to listen, explain, and reassure,' he said. The judge said human empathy was central to justice, whether it was a lawyer responding to a distressed call, a judge presiding over a video-enabled hearing or even a chatbot answering a query. Technology was powerful, but could not replicate the human element at the heart of legal aid. Pointing to Article 39A of the Constitution, Justice Kant said the constitutional provision called upon the State to provide free legal aid to ensure that no citizen was denied justice owing to economic or other disabilities. He said India was among the few nations to constitutionally mandate legal aid. 'Yet, the stark truth is that vast sections of our population — rural citizens, the urban poor, women, children, persons with disabilities, the elderly — still encounter formidable barriers in accessing justice. These may be barriers of awareness, geography, language, money, physical mobility, or social stigma,' Justice Kant noted.

Madras HC temporarily restrains Savukku Shankar from making defamatory remarks against ADGP Davidson Devasirvatham
Madras HC temporarily restrains Savukku Shankar from making defamatory remarks against ADGP Davidson Devasirvatham

New Indian Express

time10 minutes ago

  • New Indian Express

Madras HC temporarily restrains Savukku Shankar from making defamatory remarks against ADGP Davidson Devasirvatham

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has issued a gag order to YouTuber 'Savukku' Shankar, temporarily restraining him from making defamatory statements against senior police officer S Davidson Devasirvatham, the Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) – Law and Order, over the Sivaganga custodial death. Justice P Kumaresh Babu, on Friday, passed interim orders on the civil suit and applications filed by the police officer. 'A reading of the statements made against the applicant (Davidson Devasirvatham) would prima facie conclude that they have been making statements in derogatory and defamatory manner, which would affect his reputation as he is holding high office,' the judge said. He added that Article 19(2) of the Constitution carves out a restriction to Article 19(1)(a) – freedom of speech and expression – providing protection to the citizen from being defamed. The interim injunction will be in force for four weeks. The judge also ordered notice to Savukku Shankar, directing him to file a reply to the petition within four weeks, and accordingly adjourned the case. Davidson Devasirvatham moved the application praying for an order of interim injunction restraining the YouTuber, his agents, followers or representatives from publishing, broadcasting, uploading or circulating, in any manner whatsoever, in print, digital or audio-visual form, any contents containing allegedly defamatory allegations, insinuations or imputations against him with respect to the custodial death of Ajith Kumar.

Trump Targets Nigerians in Visa Crackdown on Birthright Citizenship  Firstpost Africa
Trump Targets Nigerians in Visa Crackdown on Birthright Citizenship  Firstpost Africa

First Post

time40 minutes ago

  • First Post

Trump Targets Nigerians in Visa Crackdown on Birthright Citizenship Firstpost Africa

Trump Targets Nigerians in Visa Crackdown on Birthright Citizenship | Firstpost Africa | N18G In a renewed immigration crackdown, the Trump administration has issued a warning to Nigerians against traveling to the U.S. with the primary intent of giving birth — a practice aimed at securing automatic citizenship for their children under the U.S. Constitution. Nigeria remains among the top countries involved in so-called 'birth tourism.' The U.S. Embassy in Nigeria has also introduced tougher visa rules, including issuing mostly single-entry, short-validity visas. This move is part of broader restrictions targeting African nations, including higher visa fees, tighter interview rules, and increased digital screening — all under Washington's push to curb immigration loopholes. See More

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store