It's the pathetic way of carrying out their function by legislature and executive, which made the public to seek solace from the Judiciary. This gave power to Judiciary and is now termed as 'Judicial activism'. Most of the PILs are applied with genuine intent and to seek the true justice. It holds good for even the decisions taken by courts. Hence, with the backing of public SC is giving orders. But it should not outreach its powers and take up law making and execution of it in its hand. Instead it should try to rejuvenate the legislature and executive to function as per law else take them into swords. Finally, if all three branches dont act properly within their spheres then our (pseudo)democracy is going to fall.
RE:All organs of democracy not functioning
by Sathish N on Dec 13, 2007 04:53 PM Permalink
100% right. Judiciary is still in british age. My lord!! Every pillar of the democracy is supposed to be for the citizen, instead they behave like every citizen works for them.
It ceases to be accountable to the nation and its people.
Time and again it has proved they are civil servants protecting the uncivil mannerism of the unruly politician often circumventing apex rulings and overruling them in the House.
RE:When the judiciary resides in the deep pockets of the politicians,
by chanakya maurya on Dec 13, 2007 11:31 AM Permalink
And that house is largely infested with the criminals, goondas and lafange log.
Indira Jaisingh is a respected Supreme Court lawyer. The points raised in her article pertain to: a) There is a confusion in the mind of the Judges as to what is a PIL and what is a frivolous petition. b)There should not be any direct entry to the SC but through some "proper channel". c)The judges should not interpret the laws since this is tantamount to making laws. d) The SC should not undertake or force executive actions as in the Delhi sealing case. e) The selection of judges is biased and elitist. f) The parliament is supreme in law making and knows best.The courts should only interpret as per the letter. These observations have been made by a number of people at various times but mostly by politicians. It is most unexpected that such observations should come from a lawyer of her standing.The issues raised have been debated and there have been instances when the lawmakers have overturned fundamental rights of individual citizens in the interest of equity but these have had to reviewed and annuled. Our parliament has shown its incapability to review useless laws even as they pass laws to secure forced retirement of individuals or allow convicted criminals to remain unpunished. Can the Supreme Court pass strictures against the Govt for not implementing the punishment on the convict tried for the Parliament shoot out case.Would this be judicial interference?
RE:Judicial Accountability.
by chilkoor sachidev kumar on Dec 13, 2007 05:46 PM Permalink
'Can the Supreme Court pass strictures against the Govt for not implementing the punishment on the convict tried for the Parliament shoot out case.Would this be judicial interference?' This can be termed, selective non interference by the Supreme Court!
failure of justice is paying way for mafia held court, quick justice and acceptable for both parties
by Bhupinder Singh on Dec 13, 2007 11:00 AM Permalink | Hide replies
indian justice with political interference have created catch 22 situation,,do survay how many people respect the judiciary,, the whole judiciary have become the laughing stock in jessica lall , matto , nanda ,, pierra, salman episode,,,people regard judiciary another gimmick to befool the people,, we need judiciary according to demand of people and people friendly not minting money for justice judge,,laywers,,, it is vicious circle of harrasment and taking money from innocent public and making them befool,,by abnoxious intrepretation of law and hypothetical procedure of legal framework,, we need transferency and accountibility with discipline,,
now where do people go when goons like ramdoss with no reputation or work for public enact a law to remove a respected and renowned personality like Dr.Venugopal? it is the legislatures' rights which should be curtailed. another bet is that after the verdict from katju and mathur, all pending cases will take more time, and more cases will pile up. no respite for common people, then all will be arming up.this will finally give way to civil war.
Collect data, how many people have faith in the system, only theory. Our system caters for legal truth, not actual truth. Our judiciary is to be made people friendly, not lawyers friendly first according to 2007 requirement not 1900 requirement. Our constitution needs revolutionery change.
The same activists who think Supreme court is coming in the way of Social reforms (like reservations and regularising Illegal structures) will bay for Supreme Courts blood, if it didn't step in to remove a law made by Prime Minister Modi and BJP, to bring in repressive laws against muslims.
If parliament passes such a law with majority, would it be right? And should supreme court be a silent spectator?
actually the verdict to draw a line of limit by judges was given by mathur and katju to please the UPA, to help either katju or mathur to become the next cheif( maybe correctly -cheap) justice of SC. any bets that katju or mathur being cheif(ap) justice next?? now this SC will become a laughing stock within the country and for the world.
Indira Jaising is a respected social worker, and deserves respect.
But, her views on the role of the court is out of place. She had earlier written about how Supreme court shouldn't decide what is and what is not a Fundamental right. But, then it is repeatedly shown in history that if we don't have checks and balances, then tyranny will ensue.
A minority can not command the attention of a parliament which depends on majorities votes. That is why India is a republic - where Judiciary applies the law - without fear (of voters) or favor. Parliament is not a body that can do that.
Populist measures and laws with an eye on vote, can't be good law making. And supreme court does have a role to play in making sure the parliament doesn't impinge on the right of a minority.
the delhi mess is only because of the Executive not functioning properly and subsequent enforcement of law! In the first case how is that voilations have comeup! so it is the duty of SC to get involved and save the public from this foolish law makers and compromising law enforcement! if not only mob laws come into picture. Tommorow a rape victim may not be able 2 goto judiciary as it may say police is there to listen 2 your problem..and it will be solved by them(sarcasticallyfrom me)..u know wht happend in AIIMS, reservation cases etc.
