The Big Story: Unfinished business

Last week, the Supreme Court, for the second time in its history, held a post-midnight hearing when the Congress party knocked on its doors to question the actions of the Karnataka governor in inviting Bharatiya Janata Party leader BS Yeddyurappa to form the government in the state. Yeddyurappa did not have the support of more than half the MLAs in the Assembly and yet the governor gave him 15 days to prove his majority on the floor of the house.

When the Congress moved the petition before the Supreme Court registry on Wednesday night, not many believed that the matter was urgent enough to wake the court up at late hours. The party had last month tried to unsuccessfully impeach Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, levelling serious allegations against him. It was Misra as the master of the roster who had to take a call for an urgent hearing.

Despite the fact that the matter did not involve a question of life and death, as it did in the case of Yakub Memon in 2015, Misra chose to grant a post-midnight hearing. A three-member bench that did not include him was formed. The bench asked the BJP to prove its majority on the floor of the Assembly the next day. The BJP was unable to muster the required strength. Yeddyurappa resigned without taking the floor test.

It was clear that the court’s intervention completely changed the scenario by reducing the time given by the governor for the BJP to get the numbers. In doing so, the court came to the rescue of the democratic process that was being subverted by a clear abuse of power by the governor.

Since this hearing, there has been a lot of praise for the Supreme Court. For an institution that has faced unprecedented turmoil since November last year, this was an important case to show that it remains the final arbiter protecting the rights and liberties of citizens and the constitutional framework of the country.

However, this one case should not be seen as the remedy for all the troubles the court has gone through in the last few months. The questions of institutional independence raised by four senior judges of the court in a press conference on January 12 remain unaddressed.

What slipped under the radar because of the turmoil in Karnataka was the fact that the Supreme Court collegium could still not come to a decision on the elevation of Uttarakhand Chief Justice KM Joseph, which the Centre stalled using the excuse of seniority and over representation for Kerala on the bench. On May 16, the collegium deferred the decision for the third time, though it had earlier in principle agreed to reiterate the elevation.

Other questions such as concentration of power in the office of the chief justice and method of allocating cases to benches still remain. In Justice Joseph’s case, the danger of allowing space to the executive’s interference in judicial functioning has become real, something that fundamentally disturbs the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. Justice Jasti Chelameswar, the second senior-most judge, had his last sitting before retirement on May 18. He will step down from the collegium on June 22, paving the way for a new judge to sit in the meetings. It is vital that the new collegium honours the in-principle agreement to elevate Justice Joseph unanimously.

In his speech at a felicitation function on Saturday, Justice Chelameswar, who led the press conference on January 12, said “democratic liberties only belong to the bold and vigilant people”. This boldness of the court will be determined not just through individual judgement, but also through the way it conducts itself in the face of executive interference. This test is yet to conclude.

The Big Scroll

Yeddyurappa’s resignation brings up the question: What if Supreme Court had not intervened?

Punditry

  1. The Karnataka Assembly poll may have reset the field for the political contest in 2019 Lok Sabha elections, argues Chandan Gowda in Indian Express. 
  2.   Allying with regional parties and conceding more space to them is the only way forward for the Congress, says Smita Gupa in The Hindu. 
  3.   India’s experience of city growth shows that districts which have a broad set of industries exhibit greater employment growth, writes Ejaz Ghani in Mint. 

Giggles

Don’t miss

Narendra Modi conjured up a glittering array of projects and smart cities that were to turn Kashmir once again into the “crown” of New India. Outside, the empty streets belied his words.

“The lure of development in the Valley may also have worn thin because previous promises have not been kept. Visiting Kashmir after the floods of 2014 that left over 250 people dead, Modi had pledged Rs 80,000 crore to rebuild the state. This weekend, he talked up the package again, claiming projects worth Rs 63,000 had already been sanctioned, and Rs 20,000 crore had already been spent.”