New Delhi: In a sharp critique of the judiciary’s growing influence, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar has asserted that Parliament is the supreme authority in India’s constitutional framework, stressing that elected representatives are the ultimate interpreters and guardians of the Constitution.
Speaking at an event at Delhi University on Tuesday, Mr. Dhankhar defended his recent remarks targeting the judiciary and underlined his belief that no institution — including the Supreme Court — can claim supremacy over the legislative body.
“Elected representatives will be the ultimate masters of what the Constitution will be… there cannot be any authority above them,” he said.
The Vice President, who also serves as the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, further claimed that “every word spoken by a constitutional functionary is guided by supreme national interest”, in response to criticism of his earlier comments questioning judicial overreach.
Criticism of Supreme Court’s Past Judgments
Citing landmark cases, Mr. Dhankhar questioned the judiciary’s consistency, especially over the interpretation of the Preamble of the Constitution in the Golaknath (1967) and Kesavananda Bharati (1973) cases. He also raised concerns about the judiciary’s conduct during the Emergency imposed in 1975, accusing the Supreme Court of overriding High Court rulings that had protected citizens’ fundamental rights.
“During the Emergency, the Supreme Court ignored verdicts of nine High Courts and upheld the suspension of fundamental rights… that was the darkest phase in India’s democratic history,” he said.
Controversy Over Article 142
Mr. Dhankhar also reiterated his opposition to the Supreme Court’s recent use of Article 142, calling it a “nuclear missile against democratic forces”. Article 142 gives the court the authority to pass any order to ensure “complete justice” in matters before it.
His remarks come days after the apex court, using this article, directed the President and Governors to act on state bills within a specific timeframe.
Political and Legal Reactions
Congress leader and senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi condemned the Vice President’s remarks, calling them inappropriate and uncharacteristic of someone holding a high constitutional post.
“The President of India does not comment on such issues, and the Vice President should follow the same tradition,” Singhvi said.
Mr. Singhvi also defended the Supreme Court’s use of Article 142 as a legitimate and necessary tool for delivering justice.
In parallel, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey echoed similar concerns over judicial overreach, questioning the need for legislatures if courts take over executive decisions. His remarks have led to a demand for criminal contempt proceedings, particularly over his statement that the judiciary is pushing the country toward anarchy and blaming Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna for national unrest.
Supreme Court’s Subtle Response
In response to these ongoing criticisms, Justice BR Gavai, who is set to become the next Chief Justice of India, made a veiled reference during a hearing, stating:
“You want us to issue a writ of mandamus to the President? As it is, we are facing allegations of encroaching into the executive’s domain. Please.”
The escalating exchange between the legislative and judicial branches underscores a growing tension over constitutional interpretation and institutional authority. As India prepares for a crucial period in its democratic journey, calls for clarity, respect for separation of powers, and institutional cooperation are louder than ever.
