Governments criticise judicial activism to cover up their failure: SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday deprecated the tendency of governments to accuse the judiciary for encroaching upon the domain of the executive and the legislature by passing orders for protection of marginalised section of society through PILs.
The top court said that the governments do this to cover up their own failures in providing social justice to the people.
Taking the governments head on for their criticism against the judiciary for entertaining PILs, a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur, S Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta said that the concept of public interest litigation has become a potent and very effective force to bring about immense social change through interventions made and directions issued by the apex court.
“During the last several decades, PILs have compelled this court to consider issues relating to the environment, social justice, violation of human rights and disregard for Article 21 of the Constitution; either because of an absence of governance due to the failure of the state to faithfully and sincerely implement laws enacted by Parliament or due to mis-governance by the state, that is, the central government, the state governments and Union Territory Administrations leading to rampant illegalities,” the bench said.
“In recent times, usually and regrettably, the state has chosen to challenge the idea of PIL or denigrate it by chanting the mantra of judicial activism or separation of powers. In most cases, these mantras are nothing but a fig leaf to cover the failure of the state to recognise the existence of the rule of law and the need for providing social justice to the people of the country, as stated in the Preamble to our Constitution. There must be a realization that PIL has given a voice to millions of marginalized sections of society, women and children,” Justice Lokur, who wrote the judgment, said.
The court passed the observation while delivering a verdict on a PIL on prison reform and appointed a three-member committee headed by its retired judge Amitava Roy to recommend measures to provide reformatory environment along with basic facilities to prisoners to lead a dignified life within jail. The court entrusted the task to the committee to examine 1,382 prisons in the country and file a comprehensive report on improving living conditions there for convicted and under-trial prisoners and to reduce overcrowding in jails.
The committee, also comprising Inspector General of Police, Bureau of Police Research and Development Director General (Prisons) Tihar Jail, is to file its report within a year and would also explore the option of setting up of an open prison.
Hailing the role of PIL in protecting the fundamental rights of people, particularly that of the poor and the deprived sections of society, Justice Lokur said that PIL is one of the most important contributions of India to jurisprudence which is now being adopted by other countries too.
The bench, however, accepted that there is also some misuse of PIL and the court had exceeded its jurisdiction, but said, “it must be emphasised that wherever this court might have exceeded its jurisdiction, it has always been in the interest of the people of the country prompted by administrative mis-governance or absence of governance. There are, therefore, occasional transgressions on both sides, but that cannot take away from the significance of public interest litigation as a non-adversarial source of righting some wrongs and encouraging social change through accountability and, in cases, transparency”.
The court’s observation assumes significance in view of the recent spat between Justice Lokur and Attorney General K K Venugopal in August while hearing a PIL. The top law officer had told the bench that judiciary must exercise self restraint while entertaining PILs and raised question on judiciary donning the mantle for solving all the ills that plagued the country. But the court, however, reminded the Centre how abjectly it had failed in implementing the law framed by Parliament.
“Rest assured that Article 21 (right to life and liberty) would remain there in the Constitution,” Justice Lokur had said, indicating that court would not remain a mute spectator of when rights of people were being violated and funds meant for the poor and disadvantaged is being misused. “We are bound to question the authorities in such cases,” he had said.
Courtesy: timesofindia
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
TVK falls short within touching distance; what next to ensure majority
Chennai (PIT): With TVK falling 10 short of a majority, its leader Vijay has the option of forming a minority government in Tamil Nadu without any outside support, analysts said on Tuesday.
Senior political analyst Sumanth Raman told PTI that the TVK is likely to opt to be a minority government with outside support.
"Since it is the single largest party, TVK has the option to go for that. I don't think he (Vijay) will opt for official support from other political party's MLAs", he said.
"If he opts for minority government, the only thing is that, Vijay will have to prove the support once again after six months".
Raman also pointed out that in 2006 when DMK won only 92 seats, the then party president, the late M Karunanidhi formed a minority government with outside support.
In a completely unexpected turn of events in the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, the TVK has emerged victorious, putting an end to the almost six decade-long dominance of the two major Dravidian parties--DMK and AIADMK.
By clinching victory in its debut electoral contest, the party has elevated its status to that of a recognised political entity. However, the Vijay-led TVK did not secure a mandate large enough to form a government with an absolute majority on its own, requiring another 10 to cross the finish line. Experts have varied opinions.
Specifically, to attain a simple majority, a political party must win at least 118 out of the total 234 constituencies. The TVK, however, secured victory in 108 constituencies. Given that the TVK fell short of the majority mark, what might unfold next?
TVK leader Vijay has won in both constituencies he contested--Perambur in Chennai and Tiruchirappalli East. As per the election commission rule, he will have to resign from one of these seats. TVK sources said that the leader is likely to surrender the Tiruchirappalli assembly seat.
If Vijay does so, the party's total tally of seats will decrease by one. Then it will be 107. Adding to the number games, TVK appointed Speaker of the Assembly will be ineligible to cast a vote during a confidence motion and the party's effective voting strength will be reduced by yet another seat, which comes to 106.
Accordingly, the TVK requires the support of an additional 12 members to demonstrate its majority. As of now, within the DMK alliance, the Congress party has secured five seats, the two Communist parties have won two seats each (totaling four), while the DMDK has secured one seat, the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) has won two seats and the VCK has secured two seats.
Within the AIADMK alliance, the PMK has grabbed four seats, the BJP has won one seat, and the AMMK has secured one seat. Going by the calculations, if TVK gets the support of other parties within both alliances, it would gain an additional 21 seats.
TVK could potentially secure a total of 129 seats (108 + 21). However, the TVK does not require the support of all those parties, and the backing of just 12 members would suffice.
As Vijay is expected to visit Lok Bhavan on Wednesday (May 6) to meet the governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar to stake claim to form government, the governor is expected to offer the TVK two options.
First, he may summon the TVK chief and instruct him to demonstrate his majority on the floor of the legislative assembly. Alternatively, he might ask Vijay to gather letters of support from "allied" parties and submit them to him.
If the TVK secures support exceeding 118 seats, the governor would invite the party form the government. If TVK fails to garner support from other political parties, it will be denied the opportunity to form the government.
In such a scenario, the governor has the option to invite the DMK, the party holding the second-highest number of seats to form the government.
If DMK too is unable to form a government, the state of Tamil Nadu will come under governor's rule for the subsequent six months. Following this period, fresh legislative Assembly elections will be once again held across all 234 constituencies.
Another political analyst Durai Karuna ruled out that TVK will go for a minority government.
"If he (Vijay) gives an appeal, many political parties including Congress, VCK and left parties will join TVK", he claimed. "In addition, the AIADMK, which has decided to organise MLAs meeting on Wednesday, might also announce that it would support TVK unconditionally".
He said a clear picture on Vijay's decision will emerge in a couple of days.
Tharasu Shyam, political critic, claimed that Congress was "holding talks with Vijay."
"From now on, the DMK must change its approach and this applies equally to the AIADMK," he said in an apparent reference to some reported difference of opinion between allies DMK and Congress over seat-sharing and power-sharing ahead of the April 23 polls.
Incidentally, AICC in-charge for Tamil Nadu, Girish Chodankar, on Tuesday admitted that the Congress party leadership's decision to stick with the DMK alliance went against strong grassroots sentiment favouring the TVK.
"The local leaders, the grassroots level leaders, were suggesting if Rahul Gandhi, who has a large acceptance in Tamil Nadu, joins the campaign with Vijay, it will create a big impact and we can sweep the Tamil Nadu polls, and get somewhere around 180-190 seats," Chodankar told PTI Videos.
