From Dubey's Accusation Against CJI To Dhankhar's Critique Of Article 142: Attack On Judiciary Uncalled For

The intemperate statements against the judiciary by the BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma deserve to be roundly condemned. Dubey is a serial offender and is often seen as the saffron party’s hatchet man who gets away with innuendo and dog whistles that the BJP cannot officially endorse. His recent statement that the Chief Justice of India was responsible for a civil war-like situation in the country was a step too far, and BJP president J.P. Nadda was forced to distance himself from the remarks, saying the party does not support such views. However, it is unlikely that any disciplinary action will be taken against Dubey. A day after his incendiary remarks against the judiciary and the CJI and after Nadda’s public rebuke, Dubey was at it again. He termed former Chief Election Commissioner S.Y. Quraishi a ‘Muslim Commissioner’ for his remarks against the Waqf Act. He claimed that there was a sharp increase in illegal (read: Bangladeshis) voters in Jharkhand during his tenure. Both Dubey and Sharma slammed the judiciary for its alleged activism, saying if the courts make the laws, then why have Parliament at all? The top court came under attack over two of its recent judgements. In Tamil Nadu governor R.N. Ravi’s case, the court set timelines for both the governor and the President to clear bills passed by the state Assembly. This was defined as judicial overreach by the two MPs. In the Waqf Act cases, the Supreme Court raised red flags on certain aspects of the law, angering Dubey. His diatribe against the CJI has been criticised by the legal fraternity and the Opposition, but Dubey, in all probability, will get away with it.

After all, his remarks were not very different from what Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankar said when he took on the Supreme Court for judicial overreach by setting a timeline for the President to clear bills. His sharp attack on the top court’s use of Article 142, calling it a ‘nuclear missile against democratic forces’, has been described as wholly unconstitutional by experts. Article 142 is seen as a safety valve that can be exercised by the judiciary when there is executive apathy or legislative roadblocks. A constitutional functionary lambasting another constitutional body is rarely witnessed, and surely, it does not behoove the august office of the vice-president to adopt such a partisan attitude.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that serial offenders like Dubey have a specific task: to test the public reaction to outrageous claims that the party will not officially back. If there is a backlash, they will be jettisoned; if there seems to be support, they will be acted upon. If the Constitution is the only mantra for the BJP and the government, they should take stern action against the likes of Dubey, who have defied the statute book. By allowing such muckraking, the party is only facilitating tearing up the fabric of this great democracy.