Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal strongly criticised Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday over his comments regarding the Supreme Court's verdict on Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi withholding assent to bills.
Sibal argued that Dhankhar, as Vice President, should be aware that both governors and the President of India act based on the ‘aid and advice’ of the council of ministers, reinforcing the democratic framework in which these actions take place.
Sibal’s remarks came after Dhankhar sharply criticised the Supreme Court's ruling, stating that the apex court cannot become a “super parliament” and begin issuing directives to the President of India. This statement from the Vice President came during a recent interaction with Rajya Sabha interns, where he expressed his concerns about the court’s overreach.
Sibal responded, emphasising that the Governor’s decision to withhold assent to bills was an “intrusion on the supremacy of the legislature.” He pointed out that Dhankhar's questioning of the curtailment of presidential powers ignored the fundamental principle that the President’s actions are based on the advice of the cabinet.
“This should be known to Dhankhar ji,” Sibal said, adding, “He asks how the powers of the President can be curtailed, but who is curtailing the powers? I say that a minister should go to the Governor and stay there for two years, raising issues of public importance. Would the Governor still be able to ignore them?” he questioned.
Sibal, who also serves as the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, further challenged the notion that the President could indefinitely delay the implementation of a bill passed by Parliament. “If Parliament passes a bill, can the President indefinitely delay its implementation?
Even if it is not signed, does no one have the right to talk about it?” Sibal asked, arguing that such delays would be a direct attack on the legislative process and a violation of its supremacy.
The debate has its roots in the recent actions of Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi, who had withheld assent to several bills passed by the state legislature, sparking a legal and political battle. Sibal believes this action undermines the legislative process and sets a dangerous precedent for executive interference in matters that should be decided by elected representatives.
On the other hand, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar voiced his frustration with the Supreme Court’s intervention in the matter. During his address to the Rajya Sabha interns, he expressed concern over what he saw as judicial overreach, accusing certain judges of “legislating” and performing “executive functions.”
He argued that the court was stepping beyond its constitutional role and becoming a “Super Parliament” by directing the President on how to act. Dhankhar's comments came in response to the Supreme Court's judgment, which he believed infringed on the autonomy of the executive branch.
“There is a directive to the President by a recent judgment. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country? We have to be extremely sensitive. It is not a question of someone filing a review or not. We never bargained for democracy for this day,” Dhankhar said, raising alarm over what he perceived as a threat to the democratic framework.
In addition, Dhankhar stated that while the Constitution grants the Supreme Court the power to interpret laws, such a move would require a bench of at least five judges, underscoring the need for careful consideration before any such directives are issued.
This ongoing clash between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government has ignited a broader debate over the limits of power and the checks and balances in India’s democratic system.
Both Sibal and Dhankhar’s comments highlight the tensions that exist between the branches and the evolving role of the judiciary in political matters.
Also Read: Why no FIR in cash at Judge's house case: VP Dhankar
Follow us
