Two of the highest constitutional authorities in India, the Supreme Court and the President have found themselves at odds. While these institutions usually function independently with distinct roles, an unusual development has sparked a rare confrontation between them.
President Droupadi Murmu has raised objections to a recent Supreme Court ruling that sets a timeline for the President to grant assent to bills passed by the legislative bodies, including the Parliament and state assemblies.
The Supreme Court ruled that the President and Governors must clear pending bills within a stipulated timeframe, failing which, the matter may invite judicial scrutiny. The move was aimed at ensuring a time-bound process in the legislative system.
However, President Murmu did not receive this directive well. In response, she reportedly sent a 13-point questionnaire to the Supreme Court, questioning the legal and constitutional authority of the court to impose deadlines on the President or Governors.
“How can you set a deadline for the President to approve bills? Doesn’t this infringe upon the legal jurisdiction of the President and Governors? Doesn’t deemed assent amount to curbing our constitutional rights and duties?” the President reportedly asked.
This unprecedented exchange has stirred intense debate and is now expected to lead to high-level legal deliberations between the executive and judiciary branches of the Indian government.
Related