AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi strongly criticised BJP MP Nishikant Dubey for his comments against the Supreme Court. He questioned whether the BJP was trying to intimidate the judiciary and reminded them that Article 142 was brought in by BR Ambedkar.
The comments made by BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma criticizing the Supreme Court have sparked a strong criticism from the Opposition.
AIMIM chief and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi condemned Dubey, stating that Prime Minister Narendra Modi must intervene to stop those who threaten the judiciary.
Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh accused the Centre of attempting to undermine the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the ruling BJP has distanced itself from Dubey’s statements, labeling them as “personal statements” that the “party completely rejects.”
Also Read: MPs’ Remarks On SC| “BJP Completely Rejects These Statements”: Union Minister JP Nadda
This criticism from certain BJP leaders follows the Supreme Court’s recent landmark ruling, which established a three-month deadline for the President and Governors to approve Bills passed by the legislature a second time.
In an interview, BJP MP Dubey remarked that if the Supreme Court continues making all the decisions, Parliament should be shut down.
He stated,
“The top court has only one aim: ‘Show me the face, and I will show you the law.’ The Supreme Court is going beyond its boundaries. If every issue has to be brought before the Supreme Court, then both Parliament and State Assemblies should be dissolved,”
Commenting on the Supreme Court’s verdict decriminalizing consensual homosexual relations, the BJP MP further said,
“There was an Article 377 in which homosexuality was a major offense. The Trump administration has declared that there are only two sexes in this world, either male or female… Whether it is Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh, all believe that homosexuality is a crime. One fine morning, the Supreme Court said we abolish this…”
When discussing issues like the Ram Mandir, Krishna Janmabhoomi, or Gyanvapi, BJP MP Dubey criticized the Supreme Court for demanding “Show us the paper as proof”.
However, he questioned the Court’s stance on mosques built after the Mughal era, asking,
“How will you show papers?”
He accused the Supreme Court of inciting religious conflicts and stated,
“The Supreme Court is crossing its boundaries.”
Dubey also raised concerns about the Supreme Court setting deadlines for the President and Governors to approve Bills.
He asked,
“How can you give directions to the appointing authority? The President appoints the Chief Justice of India. Parliament makes the laws of this country. Will you dictate to Parliament?”
BJP leader Dinesh Sharma emphasized that “no one can challenge the President, asserting that the President is supreme.”
He added,
“There is a public concern that when Dr. BR Ambedkar wrote the Constitution, the rights of the Legislature and Judiciary were clearly defined… According to the Constitution of India, no one can direct the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha. The President has already given her assent. No one can challenge the President, as the President is supreme,”
The BJP leadership distanced itself from the controversial remarks made by its MPs. Both Dubey and Sharma have been asked to refrain from making such statements.
BJP President JP Nadda clarified the party’s position on X, stating,
“The Bharatiya Janata Party has nothing to do with the statements made by BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma on the judiciary and the Chief Justice of the country. These are their personal statements, but the BJP neither agrees with nor supports such statements. The BJP completely rejects these statements.”
Also Read: BJP MP Nishikant Dubey: “CJI Khanna Responsible for All Civil Wars in the Country”
Mr. Nadda further stated,
“The Bharatiya Janata Party has always respected the judiciary and has consistently accepted its orders and suggestions. As a party, we believe that all the courts in the country, including the Supreme Court, are an essential part of our democracy and a strong pillar in safeguarding the Constitution.”
He also mentioned that both MPs and other party members have been advised against making such statements.
He wrote,
“I have instructed both of them and everyone else not to make such remarks,”
Responding sharply to Mr. Dubey’s comments, AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi stated that a Supreme Court judgment is the law.
Owaisi said,
“You are tubelights, you are thumbs-up… Are you threatening the courts? Article 142 of the Constitution (which grants special powers to the Supreme Court) was introduced by BR Ambedkar. Ambedkar was far more visionary than you,”
Addressing Prime Minister Modi, he added,
“Your people are so radicalized that they are threatening the courts. Modi ji, if you do not stop these people from making threats, the country will weaken, and the nation will not forgive you.”
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh accused BJP leaders of attempting to undermine the Supreme Court.
He said,
“Constitutional functionaries, ministers, and BJP MPs are speaking against the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has stated that when a law is made, it should not go against the basic structure of the Constitution. If the law contradicts the Constitution, we will not accept it… The Supreme Court is being targeted because, on several issues, such as electoral bonds, the Court has ruled that the actions taken by the government are unconstitutional,”
At the center of the ongoing debate about the Supreme Court’s authority is an April 8 ruling by the bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan. In the case involving a petition from the Tamil Nadu government regarding the Governor withholding assent to Bills, the court set a three-month deadline for the President and Governors to approve Bills passed by the legislature for the second time.
The court also stated that only the judiciary has the authority to offer recommendations about the constitutionality of a Bill, while the Executive should exercise restraint in such matters.
It further suggested that the President refer Bills containing constitutional questions to the Supreme Court for review.
Several reports have indicated that the Centre is planning to file a review petition against the judgment, which has been seen as limiting the President’s powers, and by extension, the powers of the Council of Ministers who advise the President.
The ruling stated,
“It is expected that the Union executive should not assume the role of the courts in determining the vires of a Bill and should, as a matter of practice, refer such questions to the Supreme Court under Article 143. We have no qualms in stating that the hands of the executive are tied when engaging with purely legal issues in a Bill and only the constitutional courts have the prerogative to study and provide recommendations regarding the constitutionality of a Bill.”
The court also mentioned that the opinion provided by the Supreme Court under Article 143 granting the President the power to consult the Supreme Court holds “high persuasive value” and “should ordinarily be accepted by the legislature and the executive.”
It added,
“We are no strangers to the arguments about the non-binding nature of the advisory jurisdiction of this Court and that even though a Bill may be referred to this Court by the President under Article 143, the opinion delivered thereunder may not be followed. However, merely because the jurisdiction under Article 143 is not binding does not undermine the principles used by this Court to determine the constitutionality of the Bill.”
The BJP leader’s criticism of the Supreme Court was preceded by Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar’s strong remarks against the judiciary.
As a senior lawyer, Mr. Dhankhar pointed out that the President holds a prestigious position and takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
He questioned,
“Where are we heading? What is happening in the country?”
He Further said,
“We have to be extremely sensitive. It is not a question of someone filing a review or not. We never bargained for democracy to reach this point. The President is being called upon to decide in a time-bound manner, and if not, it becomes law. So we have judges who will legislate, perform executive functions, act as super-parliament, and have absolutely no accountability because the law of the land does not apply to them.”
Referring to the provision that grants special powers to the Supreme Court, Dhankhar further stated,
“We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There, it has to be five judges or more… Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24 x 7,”
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
