Asserting that the judges should not govern the country or evolve policies, Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia today wondered what would happen if the executive refuses to comply with judiciary’s directives.
He asked judges if they would invoke contempt proceedings against government officials for not complying with their decisions and disapproved a recent Supreme Court judgement which said “right to sleep” was also a fundamental right.
“Judges should not govern this country. We need to go by strict principle. Whenever you lay down a law, it should not interfere with governance. We are not accountable to people. Objectivity, certainty enshrined in the basic principles of the Constitution has to be given weightage,” he said, delivering a lecture on ‘Jurisprudence of Constitutional Structure’ here at the India International Centre.
Kapadia said judges should go strictly by the Constitutional principles which has clearly demarcated the separation of powers among the judiciary, the legislature and the executive.
“Right to life, we have said, includes environmental protection, right to live with dignity. Now we have included right to sleep, where are we going? It is not a criticism. Is it capable of being enforced? When you expand the right, the judge must explore the enforceability.
“Questions which judges must ask if it is capable of being enforced. Judges must apply enforceability test. Today if a judge proposes a policy matter, government says we are not going to follow, are you going by way of contempt or implement it?” he asked.
The CJI said judges must abide by the principles of Constitution while dealing with Centre-State relations, federal policy etc in the wake of the recent scandals but clarified he was not mentioning the “coalgate” scandal.
Dear Editor, Namah. This has reference to “CJI: Judges should not rule nation, ridicules “right to sleep” and the excerpt”…Now we have included right to sleep, where are we going? It is not a criticism. Is it capable of being enforced? When you expand the right, the judge must explore the enforceability…” If only tangible and practically enforceable issues are treated implicit under the right to life and personal liberty, the State actions would go excessive and unabated. with due respects to the CJ, It is untenable for such a ridicule from the CJ. Hope that the Apex Court would continue to laudably expand the frontiers of the Fundamental and human freedoms playing the typical role of Judicial Activism ignoring the personal opinion of the CJ [not even an ‘obiter dictum’]!
with warm regards,
[Dr.] Mohan Rao B