The Supreme Court’s (SC) full verdict on the 16th amendment that was released on Tuesday focused among others on democratic institutions of the country. The judgement most importantly pointed out the arrogance and self-importance in the affairs of the country.
Criticising the supremacy attitude in politicians, Chief Justice (CJ) Surendra Kumar Sinha in the full verdict of the amendment wrote, “People are the sole source of power. Parliament cannot make any law contrary to the interest of people and the Constitution has empowered the SC to verify whether any rule has been made against people’s interest.”
In the verdict, it was also observed that all are facilitating prominence. “No nation or country was built by a person. So, if we really love our country, we all should get rid of the ego of supremacy,” the Chief Justice said.
“Until the Jatiya Sangsad earns optimum maturity, it will be suicidal to empower it to remove the judges of the Supreme Court. Judges should not be accountable to the Parliament,” the verdict read. The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the High Court verdict that declared illegal the 16th amendment empowering the parliament to remove the judges of the Supreme Court.
Due to the absence of checks and balances, the government seems to be uncontrolled, observes the Supreme Court in the verdict scrapping the 16th amendment to the Constitution.
“Human rights are at stake, corruption is rampant, parliament is dysfunctional, crores of people are deprived of basic healthcare and mismanagement in the administration is acute,” reads the verdict of the Appellate Division of the SC.
With the development of technology, the dimensions of crimes are changing, the apex court says, adding that the lives and security of citizens are becoming utterly insecure.
“The law enforcing agencies are unable to tackle the situation and the combined result of all this is a crippled society, the one where a good man does not dream of good things at all; but the bad man is all the more restless to grab a few more of bounty,” reads the verdict.
“In such a situation, the executive becomes arrogant and uncontrolled and the bureaucracy will never opt for efficiency,” the apex court made observation in the verdict.
It further states, “Even after forty-six years of independence, we have not been able to institutionalise any public institutions.”
In the verdict, the apex court also focuses on the state of the judiciary. It says that even in this endless challenge, the judiciary is the only relatively independent organ of the state which, even though sinking, is striving to keep its nose above the water.
“But judiciary too cannot survive long in this situation. Yet, no law has been formulated for selection and appointment of judges in the higher judiciary. There is no scope for imparting training to the judges of the higher judiciary. It is the high time for formulating laws for the selection of the judges and their training so that they can be equipped to face the challenges of 21st century,” reads the verdict.
It states, “Instead of strengthening the judiciary, the executive is now trying to cripple it and if it happens, there could be disastrous consequences.”
The government in September 2014 brought the 16th amendment. The amendment was challenged with the High Court. The HC in May 2016 declared the amendment unconstitutional and void. The government challenged the verdict by filing an appeal with the Appellate Division which rejected the government’s appeal on July 3 and upheld the HC verdict.
On both occasions, MPs in Jatiya Sangsad launched a scathing attack on the apex court for scrapping the amendment.
In the full verdict, the apex court also focuses on the country’s political culture. It says the state power, which is another dimension of political power, is nowadays becoming a monopoly of a few and this suicidal tendency of concentration of power is increasing.
The apex court criticises the last two martial law regimes as well.
It says that after independence, those unholy alliances of power-mongers reduced this country to a banana republic twice. People were bluffed and compromised to legitimise their illegal exercise of power.
“They did not empower the people, rather they abused their position and introduced different bluffing tools,” reads the apex court verdict. “Thus as an institution, the notion of ‘politics’ has been completely destroyed.”
It says dirty political practices of those undemocratic regimes to a great extent even infected the civil politics.
“Politics is no longer free, it is now highly commercial and money is in the driving seat which controls the course of action and its destination.
“Now power, not merit, tends to control all public institutions of the country. Irony of the history is that with the unflinching determination and indomitable spirit, we were able to free a country from the clutches of a military superpower but we have been measurably defeated by ourselves in that very free country,” reads the verdict.
The SC says even in matured democracy, bureaucracy and judiciary, like in India, there is strong criticism of parliamentarians, parliament, and bureaucracy. Earlier on June 1, the Appellate Division concluded the hearing of the appeal filed by the government challenging the HC order.
On February 8 last, the SC appointed 12 senior jurists as amici curiae (friends of court) seeking their opinions over the legality of the 16th amendment.
On September 17, 2014, the Jatiya Sangsad passed the ‘Constitution (16th Amendment) Bill, 2014’ without any opposition, empowering parliament to impeach judges of the Supreme Court for their ‘incapacity’ or ‘misconduct’.
Nine Supreme Court lawyers filed a writ petition with the High Court on November 5, 2014, questioning the validity of the amendment.
On May 5 last year, the HC declared the 16th Amendment to the Constitution illegal. The government on 4 January last filed an appeal challenging the HC decision.
The Constitution drafted in 1972 had given the MPs the power to impeach judges and decide their term in office. But after the Fourth Amendment in 1975, the power was vested with the President.
