Former Vice President of India M Venkaiah Naidu, delivering the Virendra Bhatia Memorial Lecture on ‘Pillars of Democracy’ in New Delhi on December 8, 2019, said that “there cannot be instant justice but there cannot be constant delays either.” He mentioned the four pillars of democracy- Legislature, Executive, Judiciary and the media and said that each pillar must act within its domain but not lose sight of the larger picture.
Naidu said that an efficient, transparent, accessible and affordable judicial system is a key touchstone of good governance.
In the past few weeks, the Supreme Court of India has made several observations on important constitutional bodies and posts remarkably on the ongoing Manipur violence where loss of life, displacement, human safety and rights continue to be in question both in hands of law and justice.
From alleged provocative statements by Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh; to prioritise the call for peace and tranquility in the violence hit state; and castigating an HC judge. Other significant observations included petition on Nagaland ULB Election, Delhi-Centre power row and Maharashtra political row.
SC remarks alleged provocative statements by Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh
The Supreme Court on May 17 took note of submissions on alleged provocative statements by Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh asked the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to advise the constitutional functionary restraint.
“Please advise the constitutional authority to make statements with a sense of responsibility,” a division bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala said. The SC advised that “Law and order is the state subject and we as the apex court can ensure that the powers, which are entrusted to the authorities, are exercised by them and they don’t turn a blind eye.
The top court also took into account the safety concerns of Kuki and other tribal communities in the state of Manipur and the plea seeking appropriate directions so that necessary steps can be taken for enhancing security measures in sensitive areas.
“The competent authorities shall immediately attend to the grievances after due verification and take such appropriate measures as are required to foster confidence and ensure peace and tranquillity,” it had ordered.
SC castigates Manipur High Court judge; says he did not correct his orders on quota to Meiteis
The Supreme Court further came down heavily on Manipur High Court judge Justice MV Muralidaran, saying despite being granted an opportunity he did not correct his judgement on grant of quota to majority Meiteis in the strife-torn state.
The tribals are opposing reservation to the Meiteis following the March 27 Manipur High Court order of Justice Muralidaran that asked the state government to send a recommendation to the Centre within four weeks on the demand for ST status to the community.
Read more: SC castigates Manipur High Court judge, says he did not correct his orders on quota to Meiteis
Terming the March 27 order ‘obnoxious’, the division bench with Chief Justice DY Chandrachud heading the hearing said, “I will tell you (lawyers) one thing that the high court order was incorrect… I think we have to stay the order of the high court. The high court order is absolutely wrong. We gave Justice Muralidaran time to correct himself and he has not done so…”.
Delhi govt has control over services: Supreme Court on Delhi-Centre power row
In a crucial ruling, the apex court said the Delhi government has legislative and executive powers over administration of services except for public order, police and land.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, in a unanimous verdict, also put an end to the eight-year-old dispute between the Centre and the Delhi government triggered by a 2015 home ministry notification asserting its control over services, holding that the National Capital Territory administration is unlike other Union Territories and has been “accorded a sui generis’ (unique) status by the Constitution”.
Read more: SC verdict on Delhi-Centre power row a shot in the arm for AAP
Elaborating on the Delhi government’s powers, the apex court said the legislative and executive power over services such as the Indian Administrative Service, or Joint Cadre services, which are relevant for the implementation of policies and vision of the Delhi government in terms of day-to-day administration of the region, shall lie with it.
Nagaland urban local body polls: Law of land must be followed, says Supreme Court
The Supreme court also expressed displeasure over the Nagaland assembly passing a resolution to repeal the municipal act and resolving not to hold elections to the urban local bodies stating that the law of the land must be followed.
Read more: Nagaland urban local body polls: Law of land must be followed, says Supreme Court
“We respect the local sentiments but the law of the land must be followed and it is your duty as the Union government… You have to find a solution. We cannot let the law of the land not being followed,” the bench said.
“You can’t let the law of the land not prevail especially when there is nothing affecting your personal rights or personal laws in this behalf. We are only getting people to represent you who will look after your interest at the grass-root level. How can one have objection to that?” it observed.
Read more: Cancelling Nagaland ULB polls an issue of women empowerment: SC tells Centre
Maharashtra political row
SC said that Guv was not justified in calling Thackeray to prove majority on the floor while Speaker’s decision to appoint Bharat Gogawale of the Shinde faction as the whip of Shiv Sena was “illegal”.
The Supreme Court of India pulled up then Maharashtra Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari.
“The Governor was not justified in calling upon Mr Thackeray to prove his majority on the floor of the House because he did not have reasons based on objective material before him to reach the conclusion that Mr Thackeray had lost the confidence of the House,” said the bench.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud also held that the then Speaker’s decision to appoint Bharat Gogawale of the Shinde faction as the whip of Shiv Sena was “illegal”. It said the speaker must recognise only the whip appointed by a political party.
On June 29, 2022, at the height of the Maharashtra turmoil, the apex court had refused to stay the governor’s direction to the 31-month-old Congress-NCP-Shiv Sena MVA government led by Thackeray to take a floor test. The Governors actions lead Thackeray to resign, and catapult to power a Shiv Sena-BJP dispensation led by Shinde.
Download Nagaland Tribune app on Google Play
Revisiting the former Vice President’s, M Venkaiah Naidu lecture, ‘Pillars of Democracy’, media is more or less meant to be private entity, supposed to be independent of control by the Government. The other three pillars are in Government domain. M. Venkaiah Naidu, made mention that each of our three pillars, the legislative, executive and the judiciary need to be strong- Strong in their professional competence, strong in their high ethical behaviour and strong in their commitment to national development.
Naidu had said that each of our pillars needs to be independent in its exercise of powers but organically linked to the other two pillars through the cementing the bond of national unity, integrity and prosperity.
In the wake of some of the recent observations and judgements by the Supreme Court, M. Venkaiah Naidu’s words on the importance of competence, ethical behaviour, commitment to National development resonates.
As M. Venkaiah Naidu said, “The strength of a democracy depends upon the strength of each pillar and the way pillars complement each other. Any shaky pillar weakens the democratic structure”.
