Look at the recent example of banning the convicted legisltors from further participation in the legislatures in a true interpretaion of the Peoples Representation act, by the Supreme Court. As if stung by a deadly cobra, the parties reacted in such a quick haste to bring an amendment and tried to build a consensus among political parties to 'save the legislators who might have been falsely implicated in criminal cases'. This is a case of parties shedding crocadile tears in the name of 'some MPs and MLAs', but in reality to save a large number of them including leaders of different parties from the embarrasement.
The arguement that 'falsely implicated' cannot hold water because, the ban is on those who are convicted after filing of FIR, charge sheet, court hearings and protracted length of court hearings. Following the amendment that has been referred to a select committee, the Govt, choose to issue an ordinance and sent to the President for signature. The legislature tried to usurp their power of supremacy over others.
It is a welcome sign that the President has listened to the saner counsels and referred the ordinance back to the Govt, seeking the justification for the ordinance (27/09/2013). President acting as a counter check, so far. Let us wait for the developments.
Meanwhile, a googly by the SC by pronouncing the verdict on 'Right to Vote' by providing an option to choose 'None of the above' in the EVMs. So 'Mr. None of the above' is the first candidate who files his nomination, though he may not win and form any Govt., but prevents fielding people with dark background.
Already the first voice of dissent from politicians has emerged. 'Right to vote' is the right bestowed on the citizens, 'not to vote' is not a right given under the constitution, argues one leading politician.
SC now called 'Check', but is it a 'and mate' or our willy-nilly politicians will find ways and means to have the game scratched!
No comments:
Post a Comment