Abhishek Behl, www.merinews.com
Senior lawyer of the Supreme Court Prashant Bhusan talks about judicial activism and overreach, in an exclusive interview with merinews.
HAS THE Supreme Court crossed the thin line between judicial activism and judicial overreach by suggesting that President’s role should be imposed in Tamil Nadu as DMK government failed to prevent a bandh.
Legal experts are of the opinion that it is not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to recommend the dismissal of a democratically elected state government.
Senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan, while talking to Merinews over the implication of this judicial outburst, admitted that there was need for bringing in some measure of balance to the judicial assertiveness being practiced by the Courts.
“I think that it was not appropriate to suggest the dismissal of the DMK government over the Bandh issue as the administrative mechanism had not collapsed,” said Bhushan, instead had the Supreme Court recommended the dismissal of Modi government in 2002, when Muslims were butchered in Gujarat, then it would have got a modicum of support.
The DMK government could be charged under the law of contempt, he said, recommending the dismissal of the state government is just going too far.
The Indian judiciary is asserting itself in every sphere of life and is doing what a democratic government could not have dared to do, said the legal eagle, who has been campaigning for judicial accountability and reforms in courts.
“Demolition of jhuggi (hutment) clusters in Delhi, sealing of shops and many orders on labour laws have been totally in contradiction of democratic principles”, said Bhushan adding that there needs to be check on the Indian judiciary.
To check the judicial activism from turning into over-reach, he called for setting up National Judicial Commission, which could function as a regulatory body to monitor the higher as well lower courts.
"Right now there is no system of checks and balances to ensure that judicial breaches are kept in check”, he said.
Dwelling on the proposed commission, he said that it could have members from Parliament, Supreme Court, civil society and major stakeholders, so that there is no imbalance in the system.
To ensure that there is balance between the right and duties, said Bhushan, there is need for bringing in an element of accountability in the entire judicial process.
When asked why the judiciary demanded a sacred status for itself, even as judges were paid government employees, he replied, “Indian judiciary is a legacy of the colonial era and the laws of the land are still steeped in that era.”