Judiciary versus Legislature

Judiciary is considered as one of important the pillars of any functional democracy. Even our learned and visionary builders of the largest constitution of the world thought it wise to accord a greater role to judiciary as the watch dog of the legislature and executive. Therefore, they have given the judiciary the special powers and privileges to subject their actions and decisions to judicial scrutiny. The main intention behind this prudent decision to constitutionally empower the judiciary to declare a piece of legislation or an executive action ultra vires or intra vires of the constitution is to maintain the balance of power and very much in the interest of the republic.

It is, however, seen of late that some of the short-sighted politicians ( or demagogues ? ) are casting aspersions on this important pillar of democracy openly defying the need to maintain the decency and decorum. The three pillars are enjoined not to encroach upon the working area one another. The entire judiciary cannot be painted with the same tainted brush in case there are some stray judicial decisions now and then. These politicians have no moral right to wage broadside against the Indian judiciary which is reportedly clean to the extent of more than 80% considering the high level of corruption among the rulers who would like to project an otherwise picture of them.

It appears that these demagogues are peeved at some of the bold judicial decisions taken by the courts including the apex court much against the consternation of the legislators. In fact they want their decisions to be above the embarrassing judicial scrutiny for fear of failing it. Some of the politicians from some regions of the country are more strident and rhetorical in their criticism of the courts including the Supreme Court. In the land mark judgment on the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution and the Reservation of the OBCs this has been very virulent ad nauseum ad infinitum. This needs to be nipped in the bud. If the courts state the obvious and what cannot be and should not be accepted in the larger interest of the country and if the courts strike down the unconstitutional and ill-conceived legislations of the legislative, the courts should not be held responsible. The parliamentarians are expected to do their homework properly and adequately before legislating a piece of law. They should not seek to push too many legally unviable laws merely to satisfy their chosen and targeted electorate.

The politicians should refrain from making such half-baked truths and baseless allegations. Please look at the mirror yourselves before calling others names.