Responding to the Union’s reliance on the ‘constitutional trust’ placed in the Prime Minister to defend the 2023 Election Commissioners’ appointment law, Justice Dipankar Datta questioned whether that trust had been honoured in practice. Pointing to the criminal antecedents of many elected representatives and drawing on Ambedkar and the Manoj Narula judgment, he observed that one is forced to ask whether the trust has been ‘betrayed in practice’. The remarks are prima facie observations in a matter now referred to a Constitution Bench.
The Supreme Court has referred to a Constitution Bench the petitions challenging the 2023 law on the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, under which the selection committee comprises the Prime Minister, a Union Minister and the Leader of Opposition. Justice Dipankar Datta prima facie doubted whether the process is independent, observing that a body must not only be independent but appear to be so, while Justice Satish Chandra Sharma held a Constitution Bench must authoritatively decide the question.
NEW DELHI: Rajiv Kumar, the Chief Election Commissioner, is set to retire in February, and this has once again drawn attention to an important issue before the Supreme Court. On Wednesday, January 8, 2025, the court discussed the need to speed up a decision on the legality of a new law that impacts the appointment of Election Commissioners. This law gives significant control to the Central government.
The bench led by Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta told the petitioners who have challenged the new law.”At this stage, we cannot stop the legislation or suspend its operation. It would lead to chaos and uncertainty, and we cannot do it (stay) by way of an interim order. There are no allegations against the […]