The
Supreme Court restrained the Election
Commission to hold elections for the
10 Lok Sabha seats held by the
disgraced Parliamentarians who took
money on camera to ask
questions in the Parliament.
When
these Parliamentarians were refused
permission to sign the roster and
asked to vacate their houses, they
sued the Parliament and sought court
protection to enforce a fair hearing.
While the all party decision and vote
clearly suspended these disgraced
politicians and barred their
participation in official proceedings
till investigation was complete, it
did not grant the Speaker Somnath
Chatterjee the power to ban their
signing in or evict them. Chatterjee
went further and asked the EC to
conduct new elections for these posts.
When the SC asked the Parliament for
an explanation, Chatterjee refused to
even respond to the query claiming
that the Parliament’s decision is
"non-justiciable (sic)."
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.”
|