Context:
- Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar reaffirmed that the Constitution does not visualise any authority above Parliament.
- He was responding to criticisms regarding his remarks on a recent Supreme Court ruling.
Relevance : GS 2(Polity , Constitution)
Context of the Controversy
- The Supreme Court judgment (April 8, 2025) directed:
- The President must act within 3 months on Bills passed by State Assemblies and referred by Governors.
- Governors cannot withhold assent to Bills indefinitely.
- Dhankhar viewed this as judicial overreach and incursion into the Executive’s domain.
Key Arguments by Dhankhar
- Parliament is the supreme institution under the Constitution.
- No authority, including the Judiciary, is visualised as being above Parliament.
- Constitutional functionaries are not ornamental; their roles are substantive and rooted in public interest.
Interpretational Clash
- Supreme Court: Reinforces checks and balances, especially in ensuring executive accountability and proper assent procedures.
- Vice-President: Emphasizes Parliamentary sovereignty and primacy of elected representatives in a democracy.
Constitutional & Political Implications
- Reflects a tug-of-war between Judiciary and Legislature over boundaries of power.
- Raises concerns about separation of powers, federalism, and institutional respect.
- Could fuel debates on judicial activism vs. parliamentary supremacy.
Symbolic Language
- Dhankhar likened every citizen to an “atom in democracy”, where elections reflect atomic power — underscoring democratic legitimacy of Parliament.
