![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Monday, Jan 15, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Opinion |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Opinion
-
Letters to the Editor
All citizens who cherish the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, particularly the right to constitutional remedies, will welcome the Supreme Court's judgment that there can be no blanket ban on review of laws inserted in the Ninth Schedule. Nani Palkhivala, senior counsel for the petitioners in the Fundamental Rights case, argued that one of the basic postulates underlying the Constitution was that our citizens need protection against their own representatives. Parliament is a creature of the Constitution and has no power to change its basic structure. Judicial review cannot be limited by Parliament in the name of the Ninth Schedule.
N. Hariharan,
The verdict could not have come at a more opportune moment. It brings the hope that politicians will no longer have their way in the games they play at the expense of the common man.
C.M. Umanath,
The judgment will prevent arbitrary decisions by governments becoming laws that are outside the purview of the judiciary. By opening up the Ninth Schedule for judicial review, the judiciary has once again upheld democratic values.
C.N.M. Lavanya,
C.S. Ramalingam,
Ever since the Constitution came into force, political parties have tried to tinker with its basic composition for their vested interests.
All evils, including corruption, and caste conflicts, are in a way the product of visionless legislative functioning.
R. Jayant Dixit,
If legislatures are empowered to pass laws that alter the basic structure of the Constitution, it will be rendered irrelevant. With criminalisation of politics, manipulation of the electoral process, and rampant competitive populism, legislatures do not always fully and fairly represent the aspirations or the will of the people. The situation is compounded by fractured mandates and compulsions of coalition politics. Judicial scrutiny of laws does no harm. The system would be better off if a pragmatic mechanism to ensure the judiciary's accountability is also put in place.
M.H. Rao,
The verdict is indeed a revolution in Indian politics. Though judicial review of all laws may appear confrontationist vis-à-vis the legislature, it is necessary for the smooth and proper functioning of democracy. I congratulate the nine-judge Bench for delivering the landmark judgment.
Kiran Babu Mandava,
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar said during the debate on Article 32 (Article 25 in the draft Constitution) in the Constituent Assembly: "It is the very soul of the Constitution and the very heart of it." The Supreme Court derives its authority to strike down a statutory provision from the Constitution. Jawaharlal Nehru said in an interview to Playboy magazine in October 1963: " ... with all my admiration and love for democracy, I am not prepared to accept the statement that the largest number of people are always right." The latest verdict is no judicial activism. On the other hand, the judiciary has been activated by populist legislation.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2007, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|