The Crossbill News Desk
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Tuesday (April 22) defended his recent remarks on a Supreme Court ruling, asserting that every statement made by a constitutional authority is rooted in the "supreme national interest."
His comments come in the wake of criticism over his reaction to a recent Supreme Court directive concerning the powers of the President.
Earlier this month, a bench of the apex court had ruled that the President must decide within three months on any bills sent by state governors for her assent. The judgment marked the first time a timeline had been prescribed for such executive action.
Responding to the verdict, Dhankhar had cautioned against what he termed judicial overreach.
“We never bargained for a democracy where judges will legislate, perform executive functions, and act as a super Parliament,” he had said.
On Tuesday, speaking at an event hosted by Delhi University, Dhankhar reiterated his position and emphasized the constitutional supremacy of Parliament.
“There is no visualisation in the Constitution of any authority above Parliament. Parliament is supreme; it is as supreme as every individual in the country. Every part of ‘We the People’ is an atom in democracy. This atomic power is reflected during elections. That is why ours is a democratic nation!” he said, adding that describing constitutional offices as merely "ceremonial" or "ornamental" is a flawed interpretation.
He continued, “Every word spoken by a constitutional functionary is guided by the supreme, sublime interest of the nation.” Dhankhar also criticized the tendency to question or undermine constitutional roles, stressing that such offices are fundamental to the democratic framework.
The Vice President’s earlier statements had drawn criticism from several quarters, with legal experts and opposition leaders accusing him of undermining the judiciary and misinterpreting the Constitution.
Critics argued that setting a timeline for executive action falls within the court's mandate to ensure accountability.
The Supreme Court’s ruling, which aims to curb undue delays in the legislative process at the state level, has sparked a broader debate over the separation of powers among India’s constitutional institutions.
His comments come in the wake of criticism over his reaction to a recent Supreme Court directive concerning the powers of the President.
Earlier this month, a bench of the apex court had ruled that the President must decide within three months on any bills sent by state governors for her assent. The judgment marked the first time a timeline had been prescribed for such executive action.
Responding to the verdict, Dhankhar had cautioned against what he termed judicial overreach.
“We never bargained for a democracy where judges will legislate, perform executive functions, and act as a super Parliament,” he had said.
On Tuesday, speaking at an event hosted by Delhi University, Dhankhar reiterated his position and emphasized the constitutional supremacy of Parliament.
“There is no visualisation in the Constitution of any authority above Parliament. Parliament is supreme; it is as supreme as every individual in the country. Every part of ‘We the People’ is an atom in democracy. This atomic power is reflected during elections. That is why ours is a democratic nation!” he said, adding that describing constitutional offices as merely "ceremonial" or "ornamental" is a flawed interpretation.
He continued, “Every word spoken by a constitutional functionary is guided by the supreme, sublime interest of the nation.” Dhankhar also criticized the tendency to question or undermine constitutional roles, stressing that such offices are fundamental to the democratic framework.
The Vice President’s earlier statements had drawn criticism from several quarters, with legal experts and opposition leaders accusing him of undermining the judiciary and misinterpreting the Constitution.
Critics argued that setting a timeline for executive action falls within the court's mandate to ensure accountability.
The Supreme Court’s ruling, which aims to curb undue delays in the legislative process at the state level, has sparked a broader debate over the separation of powers among India’s constitutional institutions.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment