Friday, April 23, 2021
Home News Reports Here is why any comparison between the UK SC holding UK parliament suspension illegal...

Here is why any comparison between the UK SC holding UK parliament suspension illegal and the abrogation of Article 370 is mere propaganda

Siddharth Varadarajan, the founding Editor of notorious ultra-left propaganda website – The Wire, put his jury hat today to co-relate the judgement of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom over the issue of suspension of Parliament to criticise Supreme Court of India for not ‘beginning’ hearings on the petition relating to the abrogation of Article 370.

Varadarajan, an American citizen, who often tries to meddle in the internal affairs of India through his anti-India narrative, went on to invent strange equivalence between the recent British Supreme Court decision to rule suspension of the British parliament illegal and the alleged ‘inaction’ of the Supreme Court of India in hearing the petitions pertaining to the abrogation of Article 370.

Through his tweets, Varadarajan went on to give a moral lecture to the Supreme Court of India by stating that the UK parliament moved swiftly to declare the decision of Boris Johnson to prorogue the parliament ‘illegal’ while claiming that Indian courts are yet to begin hearing. However, the ‘theory of relativity’ of Varadarajan to assert that Indian courts are delaying the hearing of petitions concerning the issue of Kashmir is untrue.

Boris Johnson’s ‘advice’ to suspend parliament and the ruling of Supreme Court of UK:

The judgement of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom pertains to a recent decision made by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, where he had advised the Queen, who is the head of the state, to prorogue parliament for five weeks till October 14.

The controversial decision by Boris Johnson was immediately denounced by several politicians across the political spectrum. However, the British Prime Minister had refused to withdraw his recommendation to the Queen.

Soon, several petitions were filed challenging the advice of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to prorogue the parliament. Interestingly, the England High Court refused to take up the matter, arguing that it was beyond the purview of the judiciary. However, Scotland appeal court ruled that Boris Johnson’s move was unconstitutional and malafide.

Finally, the Supreme Court of the UK formed an 11-judge bench which ruled that the Prime Minister’s decision was unlawful.

With the prorogation of the British parliament by Boris Johnson is now considered to be null and void, the Supreme Court of the UK has now restored the earlier status of the parliament while ruling that it was for the Speakers of the Commons and the Lords to decide the next course of the action. The Supreme Court of the UK has actually put the ball back to the British parliament to decide on the issue of prorogation.

Why the comparison between the two Supreme Court rulings is illogical?

The Indian liberals fascination with the western cultural and legal system is quite astonishing. However, the attempts made by them to appropriate western system, be it legal, political, cultural to bring relevance to the Indian system is rather absurd and illogical. The attempts made by the liberals to relate the British Supreme Court action on the executive order and an alleged ‘inaction’ by Indian Supreme Court is mere propaganda to put pressure on the country’s executive and the judiciary, which is already hearing a series of petitions on the abrogation of Article 370.

The claims of the ‘inaction’ of Supreme Court in hearing the pleas made by the section of Indian ‘liberal-secular’ media is an outright lie as the apex court has been continuously hearing petitions related to the Article 370 and also has given various directions to the executive pertaining to the easing of restrictions in the Kashmir. The Supreme Court of India has given rulings on Article 370 whenever they considered it to be necessary.

To blame the Supreme Court for not complying to the wishes of the Indian liberals is nothing short of contempt against the Supreme Court’s decisions and the law of the land. The liberals who often jump to praise the judiciary when it delivers favourable judgements have now begun to blame the courts as it has taken its time to decide on one of the most critical cases in the history of this country. The courts in doing so, have snubbed the legal activists and PIL warriors, causing worry to the ‘liberal’ ecosystem.

Secondly, the reason that debunks these comparative theories pushed by certain ‘intellectuals’ is that the decision pertaining to the abrogation of Article 370 and bifurcation of the state in two Union territories has been done by an elected parliament within the scope and framework of the constitution. The Indian government, which has been elected with a majority of seats in the parliament has democratically passed the acts in the legislature to revoke special status, including the support of various of other opposition parties.

However, the prorogation of the British parliament was an executive decision taken by Boris Johnson government contrary to a majority decision taken by the Indian government to scrap the contentious provision. So, British courts nullifying an executive decision cannot be compared with the Supreme Court of India’s decision to carefully consider a legitimate law passed by a democratically elected parliament.

In addition to that, the United Kingdom has no documented constitution and the rules, regulations, laws pertaining to its polity is interpreted through various acts of Parliament, court judgments and conventions.

However, in India, there exists a constitution, which has a detailed framework with specific procedures directing organs of the state to act upon. So, the courts in India mostly decide the legality of a law on the question of procedures establish by the law rather than due process of the law.

With this, there is a limited scope to institutions to interpret constitutional provisions. Hence, British Supreme Courts have wide powers to step in and amend its uncodified constitution contrary to the Indian courts. The Indian judiciary has always acted within the scope and framework of the constitution and has often stayed away from making laws, which is the responsibility of the legislature.

Further, the judgement by the British Supreme Court has recognised the power of the British parliament to make rules for its conduct pertaining to the prorogation of the house and stayed away from dictating procedural aspects.

  Support Us  

Whether NDTV or 'The Wire', they never have to worry about funds. In name of saving democracy, they get money from various sources. We need your support to fight them. Please contribute whatever you can afford

OpIndia Staffhttps://www.opindia.com
Staff reporter at OpIndia

Related Articles

Trending now

Nithyananda bans Indians from entering Kailasa citing Covid-19, issues guidelines for ’embassies’ around the world

Sri Nithyananda of Kailasa has banned travelers from India into his fledgling nation amidst the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In the last few days, availability of Liquid Medical Oxygen increased by 3300 MT per day: Here’s what was discussed in PM’s high-level meeting

The high-level meeting was attended by the Cabinet Secretary, Principal Secretary to PM, Home Secretary, Health Secretary & Officials from Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Ministry of Road Transport, Pharmaceuticals, and NITI Aayog members.

Prime Minister Modi cancels political rallies on 23rd April in West Bengal, to hold a high-level meeting to review COVID-19 situation

Amidst the raging second wave of the Coronavirus pandemic, Prime Minister Narendra Modi took to Twitter and informed that he was cancelling his political engagements in West Bengal tomorrow

Indian Air Force, Railways step in to transport oxygen cylinders, essential medicines to combat COVID-19

In a recent virtual meeting, Defense Minister Rajnath Singh was briefed about the measures taken by the Armed Forces in order to combat COVID-19

Congress’ attack against Covishield continues, now spreads fake news of ‘one vaccine, 3 rates’ from official Twitter handle

The previous low price was a part of SII's commitment to GOI and some other countries for sharing the risk of production. After the current 'under contract' 110 million doses are delivered, SII will sell to GOI at Rs 400 per dose, same as states.

18+ can register for Covid vaccination from April 28. Here is the procedure

Registration for Covid-19 vaccine phase 3 for 18-45 years age group to begin on April 28

Recently Popular

Priyanka Gandhi’s Twitter faux pas, takes three attempts for condolence tweet

At 10:38 AM, four minutes after her first tweet, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra tweeted correct condolence message to correct intended recipient on third attempt.

No masks, abuses and ruckus: How a Shiv Sena corporator abuses power to threaten doctors on duty

The doctors of Bhagwati Hospital have threatened to resign after being humiliated by the Shiv Sena corporator.

Sitaram Yechury’s son passes away due to Covid-19

The CPI(M) General Secretary in his tweet thanked all the medical staff who treated his son Ashish Yechury

AAP supported farmer protests hampering war against Covid-19, oxygen supplier writes to GOI saying tankers delayed due to roadblocks by protestors

Inox Air Products said that they are facing delays in Delhi while transporting oxygen due to road blockades by the farmer protestors

NDTV journalist Gargi Rawat Ansari shows how she is willing to sacrifice human lives so propaganda continues to reign supreme

NDTV journalist Gargi Rawat Ansari is married to Yusuf Ahmad Ansari, the great-grandson of former Congress President Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari
- Advertisement -

 

Connect with us

254,089FansLike
531,467FollowersFollow
24,200SubscribersSubscribe