What are the constitutional and ethical implications of the Supreme Court directing a Speaker to decide on disqualification petitions?
The Supreme Court has ordered the Telangana Speaker to act on disqualification petitions. I want to analyze the balance of power between the judiciary and the legislature, and the ethical dimensions involved.
The Supreme Court’s direction to a Speaker to decide on disqualification petitions underlines the complex relationship between the judiciary and the legislature in India. Such interventions raise important constitutional questions about the separation of powers and the ethical responsibilities of constitutional functionaries.
-
Constitutional Implications:
- Separation of Powers: The Constitution envisages a clear division of functions among the legislature, executive, and judiciary. The Speaker, as the presiding officer of the legislature, is expected to act independently. Judicial directions to the Speaker may be seen as encroachment, but are justified if there is inaction or delay.
- Article 212 and 122: These articles bar courts from interfering in legislative proceedings. However, the Supreme Court (Kihoto Hollohan case, 1992) has held that the Speaker’s decision on disqualification is subject to judicial review, especially to prevent abuse of power or undue delay.
- Timeliness and Accountability: The Tenth Schedule does not specify a time-frame for the Speaker to decide on disqualification petitions. Judicial intervention ensures timely decision-making, upholding the spirit of anti-defection laws and preventing political instability.
-
Ethical Implications:
- Impartiality of the Speaker: The Speaker is expected to act impartially, especially in quasi-judicial matters like disqualification. Delays or biased decisions erode public trust in the institution.
- Judicial Responsibility: The judiciary must balance the need to uphold constitutional morality with respect for the autonomy of the legislature. Over-interference could undermine legislative authority, while non-interference could allow unethical practices to persist.
- Public Interest: Timely resolution of disqualification petitions is essential for maintaining the integrity of the legislative process and upholding democratic values.
Answered
a month ago