The Supreme Court has asked Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan to meet with the Chief Minister and the minister to discuss the eight bills that have been pending with him for up to two years. The court has noted that the Governor’s conduct threatens to subvert the Constitution’s basic foundations, including the rule of law and democratic good governance, and defeat the people’s rights to welfare measures sought to be implemented through the bills.
The court’s intervention comes against the backdrop of mounting frustration over the delayed implementation of crucial welfare measures contained in these bills. The judiciary, in its observations, emphasized that the extended delay not only undermines the principles of the rule of law but also poses a threat to democratic governance
The eight bills in question encompass a range of issues vital to the well-being of the people, making their delayed approval a matter of serious concern. From social welfare programs to economic initiatives, these bills represent the aspirations of the citizens that hinge on the smooth functioning of the legislative machinery.
Governor approves one bill sends seven for President’s approval
On Tuesday, Governor Khan gave his assent to one of the eight bills, the Kerala Public Health Bill, and reserved the other seven for presidential assent. The bills sent for presidential assent include two University Amendment 2021 Bills, the Kerala Lokayukta Bill, two University Laws (Amendment) Bills, a Bill regarding the expansion of the University Search Committee, and the Kerala Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Bill.
The Supreme Court, in its statement, underscored the potential harm posed by the prolonged withholding of legislative consent. It pointed out that such actions could subvert the basic foundations of the Constitution, eroding the principles of democratic governance and impinging upon the rights of the people to benefit from the welfare measures envisioned in these bills.
This unprecedented move by the judiciary to intervene in the executive-legislative dynamics reflects a growing recognition of the importance of timely and efficient decision-making in the interest of the public. The court’s concern is not merely procedural; it extends to the larger impact on the democratic fabric of the state.
Governor Arif Mohammed Khan, whose role is pivotal in the approval process, now faces the court’s scrutiny for the apparent obstruction in the legislative pipeline. The judiciary has highlighted that the Governor’s conduct threatens the very essence of the Constitution, signaling a need for urgent redressal.
Kerala government moves Supreme Court against Governor
The Kerala government had earlier this month moved the Supreme Court against the Governor regarding the delay in clearing bills passed by the Assembly. The court had asked the office of the Governor to go through its verdict in a similar case filed by the Punjab government, in which the top court held that Governors could not “thwart the normal course of lawmaking”.
The standoff between the Governor and the state leadership has not only resulted in a legislative logjam but also raised questions about the functioning of the federal structure. The court’s intervention seeks to restore the balance of powers envisaged by the Constitution, emphasizing the need for cooperative federalism for effective governance.
While the specific reasons for the prolonged delay remain unclear, the impact on the ground is tangible. The citizens of Kerala, who eagerly await the implementation of the welfare measures outlined in these bills, find themselves caught in a web of administrative inertia.
Political analysts suggest that the impasse may be indicative of broader political differences between the Governor and the state government. However, the Supreme Court’s intervention reframes the narrative, emphasizing the need to prioritize the interests of the people over political considerations.
Governor’s conduct questioned by Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has voiced its displeasure over Governor Khan “sitting” on bills passed by the state legislature for two years. The court has asked the Governor to meet with the Chief Minister and the minister to discuss the bills and has noted that the Governor’s conduct threatens to subvert the Constitution’s basic foundations.
As the legal battle unfolds, there is a renewed focus on the principles that underpin a functional democracy. The court’s assertion that the delay not only hampers governance but also jeopardizes the rights of the people places the issue at the heart of constitutional discourse.
The ball is now in the court of the Governor, who must heed the Supreme Court’s call for dialogue with the Chief Minister and the concerned minister. The onus is on the executive to demonstrate a commitment to the democratic values that form the bedrock of the nation’s governance structure.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court has asked the Kerala Governor to meet with the Chief Minister and the minister to discuss the pending bills and has noted that the Governor’s conduct threatens to subvert the Constitution’s basic foundations. The Kerala government had earlier moved the Supreme Court against the Governor regarding the delay in clearing bills passed by the Assembly.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in the prolonged delay of eight crucial bills in Kerala serves as a stark reminder of the delicate balance required for the smooth functioning of a democracy. The court’s emphasis on the potential threat to constitutional foundations underscores the gravity of the situation, urging all stakeholders to prioritize the people’s welfare over political considerations. As the legal and political drama unfolds, the nation watches with anticipation, hopeful for a resolution that reaffirms the resilience of democratic institutions.
Read also: Kerala governer approves vital health bill, others swait presidential nod
