Dispute between the Supreme Court and the Centre
The dispute between the BJP-led Central government and the country's highest court has been simmering for some time now. Time and again, the government's dispute with the Supreme Court is coming to the fore on various issues. Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju recently also commented that some retired judges are part of anti-India gang and are forcing the judiciary to play the role of opposition party. (Indian Express, March 19, 2023, https://indianexpress.com/article/india/union-minister-kiren-rijiju-retired-judges-anti-india-gang-forcing-judiciary-opposition-role-8505195/). Some of the Supreme Court's judgments and comments have probably fueled the government's ire to such an extent that they are not shying away from making such direct offensive comments. A few days ago, the opposition of the Supreme Court and the government came to the fore in the case centered on the Hindenburg report against Adani in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court refused to accept the sealed envelope sent by the government. In that sealed envelope the government sent their suggestions regarding the names of the members of the expert committee. The Supreme Court not only refused to look at the sealed envelopes but also to accept the names sent by the government They were of the view that then the committee would become a government committee. In another landmark judgment a few days ago, the Supreme Court said that the state is using national security as a tool to deprive citizens of remedies provided by law (Indian Express, April 6, 2023, https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-law/ mediaone-what-supreme-court-said-on-freedom-national-security-8540958/ .This judgment is in view of how the present central government is trying to stifle the voice of opposition by labeling any opposition as against national security. However, the substance of the dispute between the Supreme Court and the government is likely to lie elsewhere. That is whether the Supreme Court shall be subjugated under the government or they shall have neutrality. The biggest manifestation of this is centered around the current collegium system of appointing Supreme Court judges. The collegium system is a collegium of Supreme Court judges who nominate names for Supreme Court judges? vacancies. If the Centre does not like this recommendation they may send it back to the collegium for reconsideration. But, if the collegium sends the name again then the central government is bound to accept this recommended list. Several times in the recent past, the government refused to select from the list sent and has again been returned to the collegium. The central government wants to give up this collegium system and take the entire power of appointment of Supreme Court judges in the hands of the Central government. The Central government's rationale is that since the government is elected by the people, it should have the power to appoint judges. But, it is clear that once that happens, the entire judiciary will become subjugated to the government. If we look at the lowest courts in the state, we will see that since the power of appointment in these lower courts is in the hands of the state government, these courts usually do not give any verdict against the government or the police, which the High Court or Supreme Court judges have the courage to give. If the power to appoint judges of the Supreme Court or High Court goes to the hands of the Central government, then the question is how far this neutral position of the Supreme Court or High Court will be maintained. As class representatives of the proletariat, we know that this impartiality of the judiciary is not a class neutral position. Judiciary is a part of the entire state system and it is not unknown to us that the state system of this country protects the interests of the big capitalists-big landlord ruling classes dependent on imperialism. The constitution of our country was written for the interests of this ruling class and the judiciary also functions to protect their interests under them. As a result, when the ruling classes exercise their power in this reign of exploitation and oppression on the workers and peasants including the toiling masses, the judiciary never stands up for the rights of the exploited classes. Rather, it works in favour of maintaining the reign of exploitation and oppression of the ruling classes. Even regarding caste-based oppression and oppression of religious minorities it cannot be said that the role of judiciary has remained impartial. That is why no one is punished in Maliana massacre or Shankarbigha massacre. Even if anyone is unaware of it, it is not unknown to the leading representatives of the proletariat, that the worker and toiling masses can expect no neutrality from this judicial system against class exploitation and oppression of the big capitalists. But, in view of the current campaign by the fascist forces of radical Hindutva led by the Sangh Parivar, this impartial stance of the judiciary has an importance. In the rise of Hindutva forces in Indian politics since the middle or end of the eighties of the last century, one of their organizations, the BJP, has been in power for some time and some time it has not. For more than three decades, the manner in which the Hindutva forces have been incessantly attempting to penetrate various organs of the state through that they have also succeeded to a large extent in penetrating the judicial system. Evidence of this is in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court on the Ramjanambhoomi Temple-Babri Masjid dispute. However, it can still be said that various judgments of the higher courts against Sangh Parivar and the Central and other governments led by them have remained as a thorn in their neck. For that reason they want to get this thorn uprooted. For that purpose they want to establish their control over the Supreme Court. If this can be done, there is no doubt that the fascist campaign of Sangh Parivar will make a big leap ahead.
07th April 2023
Comments:
No Comments for View