Former Advocate General Prof Ravivarma Kumar; former Supreme Court judge Justice Santosh Hegde; former judge, High Court of Karnataka, Justice Nagamohan Das and R Upendra Shetty, Chairman, Universal Group of Institutions, take part in a discussion organised by the Universal School of Law on the historic judgment of the Kesavananda Bharati case.
Credit: DH Photo/B K Janardhan
Bengaluru: In the last 10 years, 24% of the time in Parliament has been wasted in screaming, fighting, protesting and walking out, lamented former High Court judge Justice Nagamohan Das.
He said 47% of the bills were passed without any debate in Parliament and Constitutional amends were made without debates.
Former judges of the Supreme Court and High Court and eminent advocates gathered at the NGO Hall in Cubbon Park on Saturday for a discussion organised by the Universal School of Law on the historic judgment of the Kesavananda Bharati case.
Santosh Hegde, former Supreme Court judge, Prof Ravivarma Kumar, former Advocate General and Senior Advocate, Vishalaraghu HL, Chairman of Karnataka State Bar Council, and HH Sri Sachidananda Bharati, from Edneer Mutt, expressed their views at the event.
Last year marked 50 years of the historic judgment that was passed in 1973 after a 13-member bench heard the case between Kesavananda Bharati Mahaswamiji and others vs State of Kerala.
Seven members of the bench came on common grounds and pronounced that Parliament can amend the Constitution but cannot disturb the basic structure or fundamental features.
Hegde said: “There were rumours of political inclination of the judges who were in the bench, controversies arose, politics played a part. But the seven judges didn’t succumb to the external or political powers and pronounced the historic judgment.”
Justice Das pointed out that since last year, there has been a relentless discussion about revisiting the Kesavananda judgment. He questioned why Parliament has to be given ultimate powers. “Think about Parliamentary proceedings in the last 10 years, which have seen undefeated amendments and passing of bills. In such times, if we give Parliament supreme powers, what will be the guarantee that they won’t change the Constitution?”
He acknowledged the loopholes in democracy and questioned if there was any other alternative to parliamentary democracy.
Taking a dig at Das’s comment on the Kesavananda judgment saving our democracy and its features, Prof Kumar questioned: “If secularism is the most basic structure of our saved democracy, how are two accused in the Babri Masjid case getting Bharat Ratna?”
Kumar said: “Kesavananda emasculated the state economy for the rich to become richer and the poor to become poorer.”