Date:04/11/2006 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2006/11/04/stories/2006110402831000.htm

Opinion - Letters to the Editor

IX Schedule

The arguments in the Supreme Court over the inclusion of laws in Schedule IX of the Constitution are both lively and interesting. It is unfortunate that governments should argue in favour of including laws without restriction in the Schedule to prevent them from being reviewed by the judiciary, thus seeking to thwart one of the pillars of democracy from performing its legitimate function. This certainly could not have been the intention of those who amended the Constitution to include the Schedule to keep specific laws outside the purview of judicial review.

V. Padmanabhan,
Bangalore

* * *

This refers to Ram Jethmalani's argument that when two-thirds of MPs decide to put a law in Schedule IX, the court must exercise the power of review with discretion — "the will of the people should prevail" — and that "the legislative judgment ... is entitled to the highest respect... " N.A. Palkhivala says in Our Constitution Defaced and Defiled: "The circumstance that an action is taken with the consent of the majority does not carry an assurance that the action will be wise and just. The majority verdict resulted in Christ being crucified and Socrates being ordered to drink hemlock ... " Thomas Jefferson said: "... the tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread at present, and will be for many years."

M.K. Chubby Raj,
Chennai

* * *

The Schedule was inserted into the Constitution by the first amendment to allow the legislature to enact laws that serve the larger goals of the state and to keep them out of the judiciary's purview by invoking Article 31-B. As Mr. Jethmalani has rightly said, judges are creatures and not masters of the Constitution. If legislators enact laws against the popular will, the democratic scheme of things will ensure that they bite the dust in the elections. There can be no better check on them.

Since judicial review is not subject to such checks, the judiciary should exercise a lot of restraint while invoking the feature. What is paramount, the welfare of the masses or the technicalities of judicial interpretation?

K.S.K. Prasad,
Hyderabad

* * *

If politicians have their say in the matter, they can virtually insert a new Constitution into the Ninth Schedule without the aid of a Constituent Assembly. They can pass a law abolishing the judiciary itself and put it in the Ninth Schedule.

T. Madhava Rao,
Hyderabad