Former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud emphasized that the judiciary should not be expected to take on the role of the Opposition. He clarified that the judiciary’s primary responsibility is to scrutinize laws and ensure their constitutionality. His remarks highlight the distinct functions of democratic institutions and the need to respect their boundaries. The statement highlights the judiciary’s role as a guardian of constitutional principles, not a substitute for political opposition.
In response to a recent comment by Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, suggesting that the Opposition is “doing the task of the judiciary,” former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud emphasized that the “judiciary’s role is to scrutinise laws.”
He pointed out that it is incorrect to assume the judiciary should act as the political opposition within Parliament or state legislatures.
Chandrachud stated,
“I don’t want to engage in a dispute with the Leader of the Opposition, as that isn’t the focus of our discussion,”
He further remarked,
“However, it is important to clarify that people should not expect the judiciary to take on the role of the opposition in legislatures. There is a common misconception that the judiciary should act as the Opposition, which is not the case. Our responsibility is to scrutinise laws and ensure executive actions are consistent with the law and the Constitution. In a democracy, there is a distinct space for political opposition.”
Gandhi had previously remarked,
“We are alone working on behalf of media, investigative agencies, and judiciary also. This is the reality of India.”
When asked about the scrutiny on social media regarding the time spent with the Leader of the Opposition and the Prime Minister, Chandrachud noted that,
“As human beings, it is natural to socialize during official meetings.
He explained,
“During some discussions, such as those required by statutes involving the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice, and the Leader of the Opposition, you reach conclusions. Afterward, it’s normal to spend a few minutes chatting about various topics, from cricket to movies.”
Addressing the controversy surrounding Prime Minister Modi’s visit to a Ganpati Puja at the Chief Justice’s residence, Chandrachud remarked that such visits are not unprecedented.
He stated,
“This is not unique; prime ministers have historically visited judges’ homes for social occasions. It’s essential to assess us based on our work. Social visits do not undermine the independence we maintain in our roles.”
This controversy arose in September after PM Modi attended the Ganpati Puja at the residence of the then Chief Justice, prompting criticism from opposition parties like Congress and Trinamool Congress (TMC), who raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.