Constitution above all three democracy wings, says CJI Gavai
Live Events
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
New Delhi: Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai on Wednesday said the Constitution of India is supreme, and all three wings of our democracy - the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary- are under the Constitution of India.The CJI said this on Wednesday at a private event in his hometown of Amravati in eastern Maharashtra.It might be mentioned here that Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar last month had remarked that the judiciary should not encroach on the role of other institutions.In April, the Vice President had said that the Parliament is supreme and MPs are the ultimate masters of the Constitution. Dhankhar had further said that "there cannot be any authority above them".The VP had further raised questions over the remit of the Supreme Court within the framework of the government as defined in the Constitution.Speaking at a Delhi University event in April, the Vice President had also said that "every word spoken by a constitutional functionary is guided by supreme national interest".CJI Gavai, on Wednesday, said that "there is always a discussion as to which wing of democracy - executive, legislature or judiciary - is supreme. Many say and believe Parliament is supreme but for me it is the Constitution".He added "neither the Parliament, nor the Executive nor the judiciary are supreme. It is only the Constitution of India which is supreme. All the wings are under the Constitution (of India)".Referring to a judgment passed by the top court on the foundation of the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, CJI Gavai said Parliament has the power to amend, but it cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution.A judge does not become independent just by passing orders against the government, the CJI added."A judge should always remember that we have a duty, and we are custodians of the rights of citizens and constitutional values and principles. We don't just have power, but a duty is cast upon us," CJI Gavai said on Wednesday.A judge should not be guided by what people will say or feel about their judgment, he said."We have to think independently. What people will say cannot become a part of our decision-making process," CJI Gavai added. The top judge also asserted that he always let his judgments and work speak, and always stood by the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.Also referring to his judgment against " bulldozer justice ", he said the right to shelter is supreme.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Former CJI seeks level-playing field in simultaneous poll plan
NEW DELHI: Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud has raised some concerns about simultaneous state and parliamentary elections in his submissions to a joint parliamentary committee and called for a level-playing field between smaller and national parties, people aware of the matter said on Thursday. The proposal to align elections – known colloquially as one nation, one election (ONOE) – was a part of the BJP's 2024 poll manifesto. (PTI) Ex-CJI Chandrachud and another former CJI, JS Khehar, are set to attend on July 11 a meeting of the JPC examining the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, which are intended to roll out simultaneous polls in the country, the people cited above said. The 39-member JPC — headed by Bharatiya Janata Party leader PP Chaudhary — was set up in December 2024. Although there is no time frame for the submission of the report, the term of the JPC has been extended till the first day of last week of the upcoming Monsoon Session. The proposal to align elections – known colloquially as one nation, one election (ONOE) – was a part of the BJP's 2024 poll manifesto and is backed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who argues that it will trim election costs and shift focus to governance. But the proposal is fiercely opposed by a raft of political parties and activists who allege that it will hurt democratic accountability and federalism. The bills propose the alignment process to begin in 2029 and the first simultaneous elections in 2034. 'Justice Chandrachud has also given his opinion about the proposed ONOE. In his submission to JPC in April, he has pointed out that concerns about simultaneous elections possibly marginalising smaller or regional parties because of the dominance of better resourced national parties is a significant policy aspect which warrants legislative attention,' said the person quoted above. A clutch of regional parties such as the Rastriya Janata Dal (RJD) have alleged that the proposed legislation can dent federalism. 'The former CJI has noted that to ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened. Referring to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 that impose ceilings on the amount a candidate can spend for campaign, there are no corresponding limits on the expenditure incurred by political parties themselves he said. This gap in regulation weighs the electoral process towards parties with greater financial resources he said,' the person quoted above said. On the fear that simultaneous elections may infringe upon the right of voters to choose their elected representatives, the former CJI pointed out that even in instances where the duration of either the Lok Sabha or the assembly expires before the full term, the legislation provide for conducting mid-term elections, ensuring that the Indian electorate remains continuously represented by their duly elected representatives. 'He is of the view that the proposal would be violative of the basic structure doctrine only if the facet of non-simultaneous elections to every tier of the government is a basic feature of the Constitution,' the person quoted above said. Chandrachud is also learnt to have weighed in on the provisions for no-confidence motion. 'He has pointed out that the cardinal principle of parliamentary democracy is that the council of ministers, headed by the Prime Minister, must always have the support of the House. This principle will be diluted if there is a time bar on introducing the no-confidence motion. Similarly, one of the common features of a multi-party democracy such as India is the inability of any party or coalition of parties to secure the majority in the House. If the issuance of a notice of no-confidence is contingent on the motion of confidence, there is a real possibility of the minority government continuing in power. This is contrary to democratic tenets,' said the person quoted above. The bill now being examined by JPC suggests adding Article 82(A) (simultaneous elections to the House of the People and all legislative assemblies) and amending Articles 83 (duration of Houses of Parliament), 172, and 327 (power of Parliament to make provisions with respect to elections to Legislatures). It also states that the provisions of the amendment will come into effect on an 'appointed date,' which the President will notify on the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after a general election. As per the bill, the 'appointed date' will be after the next Lok Sabha elections in 2029, with simultaneous elections slated to begin in 2034. According to a person aware of the details, the meeting on July 11 will see JPC also interact with former Union minister and Congress leader M Veerappa Moily and former Congress lawmaker EMS Natchippan. From the first elections in Independent India in 1952 until 1967, polls were held simultaneously across the country. But since the Lok Sabha and state assemblies can be dissolved before their tenures end, the state and national elections came to be held at different times after that. Several committees, including a parliamentary panel, the Niti Aayog and the Election Commission of India, have studied simultaneous polls in the past, backing the idea but flagging logistical concerns.
The Print
2 hours ago
- The Print
‘Anti-constitutional': Cong slams RSS over call to review terms ‘Socialist', ‘Secular' in Constitution's Preamble
'The thinking of the RSS-BJP is anti-constitutional. Now, RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale has demanded a change in the preamble of the Constitution,' the Congress said in a post on X. In a post in Hindi on X, the Congress said it will never allow the BJP-RSS 'conspiracy' to succeed and will oppose any such move. New Delhi, Jun 26 (PTI) The Congress on Thursday accused the RSS and the BJP of being 'anti-constitutional' after Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale called for reviewing the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Constitution. The party claimed that Hosabale wants the words 'socialist' and 'secular' to be removed from the preamble. 'This is a conspiracy to destroy Baba Saheb's Constitution, which the RSS-BJP has been hatching for long,' the Congress said. The opposition party claimed that when the Constitution was implemented, the RSS opposed it and burnt its copies. 'In the Lok Sabha elections, BJP leaders were openly saying that they needed more than 400 seats in Parliament to change the Constitution, but the people taught them a lesson. 'Now, once again, they are engaged in their conspiracies, but Congress will not let their intentions succeed at any cost. Hail Constitution,' the Congress said. The RSS, the ideological mentor of the ruling BJP, on Thursday called for reviewing the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Constitution, saying they were added during the Emergency and were never part of the Constitution drafted by B R Ambedkar. Addressing an event here organised on the Emergency, Hosabale said, 'The preamble of the Constitution, Baba Saheb Ambedkar never had these words. During the Emergency, when fundamental rights were suspended, Parliament did not work, the judiciary became lame, then these words were added.' He said discussions were held on this issue later, but no effort was made to remove them from the preamble. 'So, whether they should remain in the preamble should be considered,' he added. PTI SKC RHL This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
From The Hindu, June 27, 1975: President proclaims national Emergency
New Delhi, June 26: A national Emergency was proclaimed to-day in the face of what the Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, described in a broadcast to the nation as a 'deep and widespread conspiracy' that had been brewing for a long time, leading to violence and disruption of normal life. After a hurriedly summoned Cabinet meeting at 5 a.m. at the Prime Minister's residence, the President issued the Proclamation under Article 352(1) of the Constitution declaring that a 'grave emergency exists whereby the security of India is threatened by internal disturbances.' A number of preventive arrests have been made by the Central and State Governments. The Centre has directed the State Governments and Union Territories' administrations to use the emergency powers for the maintenance of law and order and the unity of the nation.
