|
|
The dispute is whether the Parliament proceedings are beyond
purview of the court, Parliament has the right to
interpret law, and Parliament is beyond judicial review.
Furthermore, while the Parliament’s decision and its
“justiciable” nature are being argued, the question
is whether Chatterjee has the power to take the
decisions he has. It looks like that since he is the
Speaker, his decisions and actions are above the law and
“non-justiciable.”
While the Indian Constitution allows the Parliament to make
the laws, it defines the judiciary as the mechanism to
interpret it. While the Constitution allows for creating
policy through the interpretation of loopholes in law in
a process called "judicial activism," there is
no scope for the Parliament to interpret law.
|
