Abhishek Manu Singhvi hit the nail squarely on its head when he said that there can be no justice beyond law. Though he wears two hats i.e. of a suave and erudite Lawyer and that of a cultured, educated, articulate Politician, it was the Congress Spokesperson who was speaking and not the Lawyer in search of justice. The venue was not a court room and neither was he holding the brief of those seeking justice. In fact he is in the camp of those in the dock.
Courts cannot make Law. They uphold Law and dispense justice within its limitations. Sometimes they may gently nudge the Law makers into the path of justice. But that is where their powers end.
In a vision for democracy, the right balance has been struck by our constitution framers which is still holding good despite occassional stresses and strains. These tribulations are not due to flaws in the system but due to human fallacy. However, each pillar has to perform its role to achieve the objective of justice. If one pillar fails, others will crumble too.
Constitution has been amended umpteen times to move ahead with times or to serve narrow partisan ends or any other reason. But the moot point is why we could not narrow the yawning gap between Justice and Law? The framers of the constitution left enough hints in the Directive Principles which could have been subsequently been made into law. Alas. "It shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws".
Contrast this with the constitutional amendment inserting the word 'Secular' in the Preamble to the constitution. Was there a need? What new purpose it served? Are we more secular after its insertion than before?
Elections are round the corner. We hope we will get a new set of law makers who will bridge the gap between Justice and Law. But the likes of some contestents does not really nspire confidence. Is it not ironic that Singhvi's assertion is just in the context of contestents!
...ponder
No comments:
Post a Comment