Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

Inbuilt in Constitution

This refers to the editorial "A case of presidential overreach" (June 1). Checks and balances are inbuilt in our Constitution. Article 111 is one of them. It is meant to check Parliament from assuming untrammelled powers.

N. Chandrasekaran,
Chennai

* * *

The President has not violated any constitutional provision by referring the bill to Parliament for reconsideration, which is warranted considering the haste shown in passing it.

In a representative democracy, such checks do not constitute dissent but a healthy signal.

Col. K.N. Ganesan (retd.),
Chennai

* * *

If the President does not use his powers at the appropriate time, their very presence becomes redundant. It is evident that the Office of Profit Bill has been passed to circumvent certain political embarrassment. It is far from being a well-thought-out legislation.

P.M. Sankaran Kutty,
Thalassery, Kerala

* * *

The same Constitution that vested the legislature with the power to enact a law has given the President the power to ask Parliament to rethink a bill on rare occasions.

M.C. Radhakrishnan,
Thrissur, Kerala

* * *

President Abdul Kalam has certainly not overreacted by returning the bill. Why appoint persons of high calibre and learning such as Mr. Kalam as President and expect them to sign on the dotted line and not exercise the constitutional powers vested in them?

K.R. Raman,
Chennai

* * *

The Hindu was critical of the bill when it was passed by MPs in both Houses to protect their interests. The President, having a limited role, has also done something similar by expressing his dissatisfaction.

G.V.L. Narasimham,
Visakhapatnam, A.P.

* * *

The President has exhibited the moral courage to act in a political atmosphere surcharged with sycophancy and moral vacuum. I am sure the framers would not have anticipated that our opportunistic politicians would twist and twirl the Constitution to suit their needs.

R. Ramesh,
Chennai

* * *

Mr. Kalam's action is a wake-up call to Parliament to give legislation more serious thought. Knowing well that the bill will be eventually returned to him without changes, the first citizen has rightly reminded parliamentarians of their duty towards the citizens.

M.V. Jagannath,
Chennai

* * *

As stated in his observations, the President wants the bill to be more comprehensive. There is no need to read too much between the lines. It is the legality of the decision, and not the intent of Parliament, that the President has questioned. He is right in exercising his constitutional power.

Karanam Rao,
Kurnool, A.P.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Jacking up oil prices
Not yet an e-leader
Will Prodi pull a rabbit out of the hat?
BJP in a state of siege
Legal cooperation across the Himalayas
Looking back at 9/11 unsentimentally
Corrections and clarifications
Resist this U.S. backlash
Skewed priorities
Fuel price hike
President's powers
Inbuilt in Constitution
Reservation debate
Defies logic

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu