Opinion - Letters to the Editor

Intrusion

The editorial "Unprecedented intrusion" (Oct 19) is timely. But the systematic legislative intrusion in other domains — like amending the law to counter a judicial verdict — is also fraught with deleterious consequences. The Constitution has been amended regularly for satisfying the momentary aspirations of politicians. Reservation, which was originally meant to be in place for 15 years, has been extended. It has been widened to include the OBCs and the percentage increased to suit the whims of those in power.

Viewed in the context of the vote bank politics our parties play, the judiciary's intervention is not unwarranted.

M. Rajaraman,
Puducherry

In normal circumstances, the organs of the state are expected to function within their boundaries. But today the executive has politicised the bureaucracy and, with it, the functioning of governments. Bureaucrats are shifted as soon as a new government assumes office in a State. Efforts are made to gag the media that do not toe the official line of thinking. Heads of state have no option but to sign the bill passed by a majority in the legislature. In such circumstances, the people's only resort is the judiciary.

K.V. Satyajayanth,
Vijayawada

Chief Justice John Marshall of the U.S. said: "Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional ... " (McCulloch v. Maryland).

Both the executive and the judiciary derive their authority from the Constitution. It would be wrong to see the judiciary as not representing the people just because the judges are not elected. In many cases, our so-called representatives do not seem to represent our will.
Gaurav Dua,
New Delhi

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu