Of course the Parliament is the supreme body. The judiciary is independent but does not make laws but interprets them, and makes sure that they are applied correctly. The recent SC judgement was seen as somewhat judicial overreach, although from the point of view of public good the suggested law would appear to be correct but the Political parties did not take it kindly and want to change it through some amendment to the existing laws. All party are united in this matter.
I hope this answers your question adeqyately. Devinder
From: Gopalarao ganugapati <gvgrao33@gmail.com>
To: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Sent: Sunday, 18 August 2013, 17:46
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Rajaji's views on amendment to nullify Supreme Court verdict
The eternal question is whether supreme court or the parliament is superior. Can any of our friends answer this?
On Sunday, August 18, 2013, Venkatraman Ns <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
> To
>
> India Against Corruption
>
> Rajaji's views on amendment to nullify Supreme Court verdict
>
>
>
> The move of the parliamentarians to make amendment to ensure that Supreme Court's verdict barring convicted persons from entering parliament and assemblies is causing concern to citizens who want probity in public life.
>
> Rajaji, the foresighted statesman wrote an article titled "Lawless Legislation" in Swarajya dated 14th September,1963, disapproving the tendency of parliamentarians to undo the verdict of Supreme Court. The extract from Rajaji's article is given below.
>
> The President and Prime Minister as well as the leader of the opposition in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha should read this and derive the right lessons.
>
> QUOTE LAWLESS LEGISLATION
>
> Laws passed contrary to fundamental principles of law have been called `lawless‟ laws. When they are contrary not only to fundamental principles but to the express Articles of the Constitution embodying them, they are still more lawless.
>
> And the climax of lawlessness is reached, when the law actually seeks to amend the Constitution itself, in order to bring it into line with itself. The lawlessness is aggravated by a spirit of open rebellion against the Constitution.
>
> The Constitution has, no doubt, laid down procedure for amending the Constitution. To utilize those provisions in order to legalize what is contrary to the intent and purpose of the Articles relating to fundamental – that is, inviolable – basic rights is to use the letter of the Constitution to defeat the Constitution itself and to "make faith void and sacred promises of none effect".
>
> These rights embodied in the Constitution are called fundamental, because they are not rights newly conferred on the citizen by the State but are a recognition and confirmation of freedom coeval with birth in a civilized country.
>
> If each time the Supreme Court gives an adverse verdict against the Government in respect of the validity of a law passed at its instance, the Government organize a constitutional amendment to be steam rolled though Parliament in order to make the judicial pronouncement of none effect.
>
> In the process, the image of the Supreme Court is bound to lose all public respect. Supreme Court will ultimately lose its own sense of confidence and independence. It is superfluous to point out that this is against the spirit and structure of the Constitution.
>
> UNQUOTE
>
> N.S.Venkataraman
>
> Nandini Voice For The Deprived
>
> Email :- nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com
>
--
G.V.Gopalarao,BA,BE,DIIT,MIE
Professional Engineer (IEI)26/378A,Buttaipeta.Machilipatnam,521001INDIA.Phone: Landline 91 8672 221315Cell:7893935473
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
No comments:
Post a Comment