Muscling Constitution

Dr Suresh Mathew Dr Suresh Mathew
23 Jan 2023
As if the efforts from the government are not enough, some constitutional persons too have joined the chorus to take on the judiciary.

The recent weeks witnessed an avalanche of attacks against the apex court. Significantly, it came not only from the government but from a couple of constitutional bodies too. The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts has always been a matter of tussle between the Central government and the Collegium of the Supreme Court. 

There were occasions when the government sent back to the Collegium the names suggested by it for reconsideration. But it usually got solved with the Collegium sending the file again to the government recommending the same names; and the government, without creating a fuss, used to clear it.

It is not so in the Narendra Modi regime. It has become a rule, unlike an exception earlier, for the government to return files, containing the names of probable judges, to the Collegium. 

Adding insult to injury, the government sits over even those names which have been reiterated by the Collegium. Reports suggest that there are over 100 recommendations made by the Collegium of high courts pending with the government. 

Similarly, there are reportedly the names of 10 judges recommended for elevation which have not got the green signal from the Centre. 

Now comes the bolt from the blue. The Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju has written a letter to the Chief Justice of India stating that the government should have a bigger say in the appointments to the higher judiciary. He has proposed that a government nominee should be included in the search committee which will shortlist names to the High Courts and Supreme Court Collegium. 

In other words, the government wants to have its nominees as Judges in the higher courts. The whole effort seems like an overbearing government breathing down the judiciary’s neck. The government has almost achieved its target of having its ‘yes men’ in Raj Bhavans across the country and as heads of many other bodies. It has apparently not achieved its target in the judiciary, and the present efforts are nothing but a bid to tackle it.

As if the efforts from the government are not enough, some constitutional persons too have joined the chorus to take on the judiciary. That is what the Rajya Sabha chairperson Jagdeep Dhankhar and the Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla did at a conference of all-India presiding officers in Jaipur recently. 

Dhankhar even questioned the judicial mandate of ‘non-violation of the basic structure of the Constitution’, stating that the Parliament must have the right to amend the Constitution in whichever way it wants. The Lok Sabha Speaker too remarked that judiciary should respect the sanctity of the legislative body, indirectly hinting at the supremacy of the Parliament. 

It seems those holding constitutional posts are dismissive of the basic structure of the Constitution which includes fundamental rights, federal structure of the state, judicial review, etc. If these corner stones are allowed to be trampled upon by elected bodies, democracy would become meaningless. 

It is important to take note of what B. R. Ambedkar said: “All of us are aware of the fact that rights are nothing unless remedies are provided whereby people can seek to obtain redress when rights are invaded.” If the supremacy of the Supreme Court is overstepped by any legislative body, who will be there to redress violation of even the fundamental rights of ordinary mortals?

Recent Posts

Communal hatred, seeded by colonial divide-and-rule and revived by modern majoritarianism, is corroding India's syncretic culture. Yet acts of everyday courage remind us that constitutional values and
apicture Ram Puniyani
16 Feb 2026
What appears as cultural homage is, in fact, political signalling. By elevating Vande Mataram symbolism over inclusion, the state is diminishing the national anthem, unsettling hard-won consensus, and
apicture A. J. Philip
16 Feb 2026
States are increasingly becoming laboratories of hate; the experiment will ultimately consume the nation itself. The choice before India is stark: reaffirm constitutional citizenship, or allow adminis
apicture John Dayal
16 Feb 2026
Mamata Banerjee's personal appearance before the Supreme Court of India has transformed a procedural dispute over SIR into a constitutional warning—questioning whether institutions meant to safeguard
apicture Oliver D'Souza
16 Feb 2026
This is a book by two redoubtable Jesuit scholars. Lancy Lobo is currently the Research Director of the Indian Social Institute in New Delhi, while Denzil Fernandes was its former Executive Director.
apicture Chhotebhai
16 Feb 2026
The cry "Why am I poor?" exposes a world where fear of the other, corrupted politics, and dollar-driven power reduce millions to "children of a lesser god." Abundance will coexist with deprivation, an
apicture Peter Fernandes
16 Feb 2026
O Water! There is a facade of democracy. In which caste is appropriated As a religious tool, To strengthen the caste hierarchy For touching their water.
apicture Dr Suryaraju Mattimalla
16 Feb 2026
From Washington's muscle diplomacy to Hindutva's cultural majoritarianism, a dangerous erosion of values is reshaping global and Indian politics. When power replaces principle and identity overrides j
apicture Thomas Menamparampil
16 Feb 2026
In today's world, governance is not merely about policies. It is about performance. The teleprompter screen must glow. The sentences must glide. The applause must arrive on cue.
apicture Robert Clements
16 Feb 2026
From Godhra to Assam, a once-neutral word has been weaponised to stigmatise, harass, and exclude a section of the people. This is not a linguistic accident but a political design wherein power turns l
apicture A. J. Philip
09 Feb 2026