If the corrupt polititians don't undo the Jan 11th 2007 judgement on the 9th schedule, it will be no doubt a red letter day in the history of FREE INDIA. Supreme court is Supreme and should have the last say in all the matters related to the constitution. But, this minority govt. with as many as 24 ministers from Rajya Sabha, who could not win peoples mandate, will now try to do all that they can to buy the judiciary. Now the judiciary should prove itself that they really care for the citizens and their rights. Prabhakar Rao
dear friends[antireservationists status quoists mainly rsswallahs and almost all uppercasteists] i can understand ur anger against the article which critizises the 9th schedule judgement as the judgement has provided u a lot of comfort and happiness.but dear friends ur happiness may be short lived and boomerang as any declaring null and void of reservation will lead to a demand for a fresh constituent assembly which will defenitely include proportionately representative in the preamble of the constitution and will without dhoubt establish the supremacy of the parliament. the current judgement is like that of king gyanendra dissolving the elected govt and taking all the powers in his hands.this judgement too will meet the same fate as that of gyanendra beleived to be the avatar of lord vishnu.we the proreservationists pseudo secularists toilet paper[caste certificate] holders will not take any judgement affecting the representaion of the dalits lying down as the toilet paper as given us some level of strength to fight.the most funniest part is the supreme court finds laws like tada,pota constitutional while in reality they r the opposite of right to freedom of speech[pls remember vaiko an mp in jail for 18 months for saying what he beleives in a meeting]right to equality[pls remember the thousands of innocents kept in jail under these laws for yrs without any trial,proof]while reservation laws [ dr ambedkar the chairmen of constituent assembly fought thru out his life for reservation/representation for downtrodden] are unconstitutional.
RE:time for a new constituent assembly
by amit joshi on Jan 25, 2007 12:26 PM Permalink
i can only pity upon u.times have changed...firstly govt. jobs r on decline and secondly this is the age of entrepreneuers where toilet paper holders like u have no place.sad but true...babasahab could do only so much.but in vain.u have missed the bus...again.
The learned author, as a Supreme Court lawyer has not touched upon nor commented on the NEXUS between Police-Politicians-Criminals, which have been the factors responsible for many a ill in the country. ARE POLICE REFORMS, the recommendations for which have been 'dustbinned' for decades since independence - be it K.Hanumanthya report, Police Commissions of the Centre and State Governments. Perhaps this would resolve many a problem including preventing such 'venturous acts' like NITHARI, Jessika Lall and others? A former Director General of Police of Assam; UP Police and that of BSF %u2013 Shri Prakash Singh has been on the forefront in his tirade against the lethargy of the Central and State Governments almost single handed but where is the outcome? Vinod Tuli.
the writer seems to have lost the basic need of any society.... the atomic structure of any organism is "individuality" and "Equality".
Equality or any other only exists on basic individuality, its basic human rights. Ms. Inder Jai Singh does not personally approve the equality of woman to man. Most anti-men laws of india supported by these weired femminst. I like to see the changes to Domestic Violence, 498a laws changed as well.... let men have eqaul rights to women.... let all men vote....
Sorry to read language of a 'well known' supreme court lawyer, Indiara Jaishing seems to be defending the established gorillas of public intrest, that is the NGOs and activists who write occasional novels, and draw salary and fame in name of public intrest.
We were informed that supreme court was bestowed with the power to decide on such issues as rights etc in that constitution. There is no issue here.
How is the laws formulated by the political parties, lot of whom are run by gozillas feeding from foreign funds, becomes the aspiration of the nation ? It seems as if the author defending defending dictatorial demagougy and skirting the issues of misuse by the gozillas.
How are the lawyers and specially the group of activist lawyers getting invitation from ford foundation or chinese propaganda are affected by these ?
I have the same type of confusion as the author has...but here it is when the ninth schedule is beyond judicial scrutiny
What if a party favouring a particular community get majority and make a constitutional ammendment that "All Minister Posts are reserved for that particular community" and put it in ninth schedule???
The intent of the original Ninth Schedule was genuine but politicians (with helpful advice from bureaucrats) have misused it in later stages. In this article, it was very unbefitting of a SC lawyer to do the %u2018hypothetical%u2019 possibilities of what all could happen after the Jan 11, 2007 judgment. In recent time, with no other places to go (not to the police, not to the politicians), people have relied on SC as a final resort. The SC%u2019s image has been growing among the nation%u2019s masses in the last few years and there is no debating on that. Bringing in accountability and severely punishing the corrupt and the incapable is definitely needed in all the sectors %u2013 that is a different matter altogether. Jai Hind.
Supreme court has once again proved that it is not biased to any section. As many readers pointed out, Indira has analysed only one side of the judgement. As a senior supreme court lawyer if she analyses and gives the other side of jugement, it will be good. saye
Supreme court has once again proved that it is not baised towards any section. Indira has analysed one side of the judgement. I would request her to analyse the other side of the judgement and give her comments.
While I agree with what SC had done with respect to the IX Schedule - which will act as a policeman of the parliment, who acts as policeman for SC (and other courts). We are talking about a house were remarks on judge and judgement are not welcome (and even hostile as proved in a case in Kerala against a newspaper - don't remember the exact one though). Who is going to do checks and balances for Courts and Judges. We (People and Media) should have some rights over here.
