United Front govt set to curb judicial activism

George Iype in New Delhi

Mounting pressure from the Indian judiciary, which has taken over the Executive's functions in a number of instances in recent months, has forced the United Front government to search for ways to rein in the nation's courts.

Thus in a move to curb judicial activism, the H D Deve Gowda regime has decided to introduce two pieces of legislation in next week's Budget session of Parliament.

Drafts of these bills are currently being given finishing touches by the federal law ministry. They seek to restrain the filing of public interest litigation in the courts and give the Executive more powers in the transfer and appointment of judges across the country.

Sources said Lok Sabha Speaker Purno A Sangma and Law Minister Ramakant Khalap, who have hurled charges of populism at the judiciary, are believed to be the proponents behind the legislation.

Sangma and Khalap claim their effort is to improve the strained relations between the three arms of the government -- the Executive, Judiciary and Legislature. But the move is widely perceived to be an attempt to check 'the over-enthusiasm' of the judiciary that in recent months has put some of the nation's leading politicians at the receiving end of judicial attention.

Khalap says the government will not proceed with these bills without consulting major political parties. ''But we are planning to bring in this legislation to fulfill the government's promise to initiate legal reforms in the country," the Union law minister told Rediff On The NeT.

All the political parties, he said, are of the view that the Executive should have a say in matters pertaining to the transfers and appointment of judges.

"India is one of those few countries where the judiciary itself settles all matters relating to the appointment of judges,'' the law minister said.

United Front leaders point out that in the winter session of Parliament, Congress spokesperson V N Gadgil had tabled a private member's Bill in the Rajya Sabha to set up a commission for the appointment of Supreme Court and high court judges.

Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court is the final authority in the appointment of judges. Legal experts say the government will have to amend Article 124 of the Constitution to empower the Executive in judicial matters.

As for the Public Interest Litigation Bill, Khalap said the move is meant ''to stop the umpteen frivolous litigation'' filed daily in courts across the country.

The draft of the proposed PIL Bill has suggested a mandatory interest-free deposit of Rs 100,000 for every PIL in the Supreme Court and Rs 50,000 in the high court. This deposit will be refunded only if the petitioner wins the case.

Legal luminaries view the PIL Bill as a government move to protect politicians involved in corruption cases and scandals. "Investigations into a number of scandals were seriously taken up after PILs were filed in the courts,'' says Supreme Court advocate Shanti Bhushan.

Bhushan, who is also a former Union law minister, told Rediff On The NeT that ''it is for the courts to decide whether to entertain needless PILs. Therefore, the government's argument that there has been an abuse of PILs is without any merit.''

While the attempt to curb judicial activism gains momentum among the coalition government's constituents, sources said the Front is also planning to set up a committee of constitutional experts to recommend measures to promote harmony between the three pillars of government.

Such a committee, a law ministry official said, will examine why the established norms and conventions regarding the interface between the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary have failed in the country.