THIS TREND NEEDS TO BE ARRESTED
There is now evidently a growing tendency amongst SupremeCourt Judges hearing high profile cases of alleged corruption, to pass on remarks almost contemptuous and unbecoming of the supposedly exalted office they hold protected under the Constitution. A Judge or a bench of judges are supposed to hear the arguments on behalf of the prosecution and the accused on the basis of a chargessheet framed under various sections of various laws enacted by the Parliament, hear the arguments of litigant and defendants without passing any adverse remarks during the course of the hearing lest it be construed that they had already formed an opinion in the case which will certainly amount to miscarriage of justice. In the Pubvlic Interest litigation in 2G scame and unearthing black money the learned judges have been cocking a snook at every given opportunity at the executive who happen to frame the laws in the first place. The Executive consists of the Government of the day formed by a party or coaliation commanding a majority in the lower house of Parliament. They owe it to the electorate of india and judicial review of the acts and rules framed are subject to the constitution of India and the Court needs to assure that none of the sections of the act acts in prejudice against the intent of the constitution. In both the high profile cases, the litigants are eminent figures from various sections of society including leading legal luminaries, former bureacrats, Election Commissioners, PoliceCommissioners who see a rot in the political system and seek a judicial review which is unconstitutional.We have chosen a form of government and it is for the people of the country to seek remedies in the system through their intelligent exercise of power during voting. Comments like no one howeover powerful or influential he/she could be will be allowed to escape stem up from pre conceived notions about the case.The case in 2G relates to perceived presumptive losses to Government when it was alloted on FCFSbasis instead of auction.This is an administrative decision of the Government approved by TRAI and the Cabinet. The mind boggling figures by the CAG should not form the basis of the case. The specific charge against the then Telecom Minister is that he derived pecuniary benefits while alloting spectrum.This has now been extended to cover the party he represented in the Cabinet, the leadership of the party as part of a sinister game plan to silence a movement of almost 70 years of existence. The learned judges are to hear the arguments of the prosecution and that of defendants and then pronounce a verdict and not give a ball by ball running commentary every time the case is posted for hearing before the bench. Supreme court monitoring a case itself is a slap on democratic functioning of an electedGovernment. This is not enshrined in the constitution. We can very well leave the administration of the country with the learned judges and need not waste huge sums of money in electing our representatives to form governments and legislate. Even in the case of CVC Thomas, the SC should have suggested removal of CVC and not removed him as they did.It is just not their job. This alarming trend needs to be stopped and for that to happen our political parties should become more transparent and more law abiding.
|
|
