"An intrusion on supremacy of legislature": Kapil Sibal criticises VP Dhankar's remarks on SC ruling on Governors

New Delhi [India], April 18 (ANI): Amid the Bharatiya Janata Party leaders raising objections to the Supreme Court's verdict on Tamil Nadu Governor withholding assent for bills passed by the state legislature, Congress leader Kapil Sibal said on Friday hit out at Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar, saying that the VP should be aware of President and Governor acting on the 'aid and advice of ministers.'
The Congress leader, and also President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, stated that the Governor's withholding of bills was actually an "intrusion on the supremacy of the legislature."
"This should be known to Dhankar ji (Vice President), he asks how the powers of the president can be curtailed, but who is curtailing the powers? I say that a minister should go to the Governor and be there for two years, so they can raise issues which are of public importance, will the Governor be able to ignore them?" Sibal asked during a press conference in Delhi.
"This is in fact an intrusion on the supremacy of the legislature, yeh toh ulti baat hai (the issue is flipped). If Parliament passes a bill, can the President indefinitely delay its implementation? Even if it is not signed, does no one have the right to talk about it?" Sibal asked.
He expressed surprise over the comments made by Union Ministers Arjun Ram Meghwal and Kiren Rijiju.
"I am surprised about the fact that sometimes (Union Minister) Meghwal says that one should stay within limits, other times (Union Minister) Kiren Rijiju asks what is happening and what if they also do it? Dhankar ji says that before, 5 judges decided on a matter when there were only 8 judges, but now only two judges decide on it. However, either two or three judges decide on it anyway, as the Supreme Court sits as a bench, even with nine or eleven judges, and once thirteen also sat together, that is how it happens. People have to follow the ruling," Sibal said.
He recalled the judgment regarding the election of Indira Gandhi, which was passed by only one judge, and questioned why VP Dhankar might be okay with that but not a verdict from a two-judge bench, since it is not in favour of the government.
"People would remember that when the Supreme Court's decision came regarding the election of Indira Gandhi, then only one judge gave the decision, and she was unseated. It was a one-judge decision, Justice Krishna Iyer, then it was okay for Dhankar ji? But now a two-judge decision came, so that is not correct because it is not in favour of the government," he said.
Dhankar had criticised the recent Supreme Court judgement while addressing Rajya Sabha interns during an event on April 17. During the event, he said that there are certain judges who are 'legislating,' performing 'executive functions' and acting as a 'Super Parliament.'
"President being called upon to decide in a time-bound manner, and if not, it becomes law. So we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super Parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because law of the land does not apply to them," Dhankar said during his address.
"There is a directive to the president by a recent judgment. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country? We have to be extremely sensitive. It is not a question of someone filing a review or not. We never bargained for democracy for this day," he said.
Dhankar further said that the Constitution gives the power to the Supreme Court to interpret the law, but that bench will require five judges.
"We cannot have a situation where you direct the president of India and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There it has to be five judges or more," he said.
Article 145 (3) of the Constitution states that the "minimum number of Judges who are to sit for the purpose of deciding any case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution or for the purpose of hearing any reference under article 143 shall be five." (ANI)