Search results

Imran Khan has shown no inclination to stand down from the political witch hunt his govt has embarked upon, which is why I suspect pakistan will not be able to put up a united political front against the Indian move. Their parliament, when discussing the issue, was a divided house, with...

This collective national Wailing going on in pakistan, esp their media, is quite perplexing to say the least. Pakistanis have never accepted India's claim to Kashmir, with or without Article 370, so what paradigm shift has taken place in the bilateral position of India, vis-a-vis kashmir, that...

Seven decades ago a ruling dispensation enjoying brute majority in both houses of parliament rushed through in adopting Article 370 into the constitution, inflicting in the process, in the words of our current home minister, untold misery upon the nation. Majority is a measure of support not wisdom.

, This is what I have been crying myself hoarse all day yesterday. We cannot sacrifice democratic and constitutional norms for political objectives. Today you support Article 356 because we don't like NC/PDP. Yesteryears congress and its supporters invoked the same article in Bihar, kerala...

India will remain a democracy long into the sunset of history, provided we respect the democratic process and do not sacrifice democratic principles, that ought to serve our democratic set up into the distant future, at the altar of political expediency. It's a universal wisdom to not saw the...

What I have set out to explain, as briefly as possible, is that accountability is built into the functioning of the the judiciary. This is so because judicial system itself is aware that human fraility should not stand in the way of delivering natural justice.

High Court and Supreme Court can determine the priority of a case and list it for early hearings. As for the rest of your post, don't know if a brain dead zombie can sympathize, but I convey my deepest sympathy for whatever that afflicts you. Get well soon.

Much of your post appears to be an angry outburst against the judges and since the reasons are unfathomable for me, I'll assume those are your personal opinions and I have nothing against it. However I strain to disagree on the question of judiciary 'creating laws'. You are right that the...

Fundamental rights, including the right to elect, exercise free speech, etc are corollary to the free, fair and uninterrupted exercise of democracy,which I'm happy to observe quite a majority of us are obsessed with. Putative tyrants may not like that we are loud about the exercise of our...

Article 3 of the constitution has laid down the procedures for such reorganization. Concurrence between the state assembly and the union is desirable, but not mandatory. No one is arguing that bifurcation without concurrence with the state government is unconstitutional, but was there any intent...

The rhetoric of 'most people' not concerned about democracy is quite charitable, but it is sufficient to say some of us are concerned and those concerns will have to be voiced, whether tyrants like it or not. Democracy, fundamental rights, right to elect, right to exercise free speech and those...

All those aspects of a citizens life, socio-economic, religion, inheritance, political - civic rights, education, etc that comes under the purview of law, becomes automatically the business of the judiciary to maintain, interpret and adjudicate. These are not extra-constitutional powers usurped...

Not a particularly good example I'm afraid. The state of Coorg and the state of Mysore were merged into a larger state, karnataka, during the states reorganization of 1956, with significantly more executive and legis lative powers than either of them exercised previously(Coorg was directly...

Reviewing the Constitutional validity of a constitutional amendment would be right up the alley of judicial scrutiny, don't you think...

I'm sure the reorganization bill will be challenged in SC and hopefully the govt will be able to share its wisdom on the matter. Govt will have to establish the Constitutional validity of the action to change the status of the state to UT and how it hopes to allay the concerns of other states...

Let me put it this way, as a domicile of karnataka, I elect an assembly which has more legislative power on wider subject matter, than the present UT of J&K has. Which indirectly means the domicile of J&K has less power, constitutionally, than a domicile of karnataka.. This does not mean that...

No state has ever been downgraded from full statehood to a union territory before, so yes this is unprecedented. The nature of 'unprecedented' means we have no past example to go by, hence why this is concerning and the need for this to be discussed at the national level. I hope this is clear.

The reorganization bill will be discussed in the the parliament and hopefully all the Constitutional pithole, like the ones raised by me, will be discussed threadbare before it is voted upon. The reason why state assembly exists is because we don't want the parliament(lok sabha or Rajya sabha)...

How is Article 370 being helpful, when it creates a sense of being first among equals. Moreover Indian constitution provides enough safeguard to protect the unique cultural diversity of people of the respective states. Is kashmir more culturally unique than a karnataka or TN. If Karnataka and TN...

If a state government is unable to uphold the constitution or abets subversion of the constitution in a state, then our constitution provides remedy to deal with such a govt (Article 356). Curiously in the case of punjab, the union government was most brazen in its support for terrorist...