tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post5224918047464725099..comments2023-09-21T16:17:51.838+05:30Comments on Law and Other Things: Justice Khanna & his solitary dissentAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09348738084817273397noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-59090642657103223222008-03-26T03:33:00.000+05:302008-03-26T03:33:00.000+05:30Yes, Justice Khanna's logic for his judgment in th...Yes, Justice Khanna's logic for his judgment in the Kesavananda Bharathi case is not well understood. For that matter, the entire notion of the "basic structure" doctrine itself is strange. I am in the same camp as Justice K. K. Mathew [personally, I think, a great and erudite judge] who said something to the effect that "I have tried wrestled all night like Jacob with the angel trying unsuccesfully to understand where the "basic structure" doctrine comes from." From what I understand, the "basic structure" is not defined in the constitution itself, it is basically what a few judges of the Supreme Court, at a particular point in time and in particular circumstances, decreed it to be. This is what makes it strange.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, I am glad for the Kesavananda Bharathi decision. To understand it, one has to appreciate that the Indian democracy in 1970 was even more elitist than it is now. Effectively, a few people wielded enormous powe and could change the constitution in any manner they wanted. I remember my father tell me that in the Indira Gandhi era, not even the ministers knew what decisions were taken by the cabinet until the minutes came out! The Kesavananda Bharathi ruling put a limit on how far Parliament could go - at that point in time, I think, we needed that. I am not so sure about the need for a Kesavananda Bharathi type ruling right now.<BR/><BR/>Just some random thoughts from a non-lawyer; please do excuse my ramblings.Sureshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12270071532015895732noreply@blogger.com