I began watching from Kushal's perspective and at the end I was convinced by Nikhil. At the end of the day it comes down to the organs of the state behaving with precedent and respect for the Constitution. If one of the organs of the state transgresses into the other we do not have a democratic state with checks and balances. US and UK have legislatures where they regulate their own behaviour so as to avoid becoming banana republic. It is unfortunate that politicians in India were incapable of moderating their behaviour and so the SC had to step in. I am still not convinced of the Judicial appointments and Collegium system. Looking forward to a podcast on this issue. Thanks a lot Kushal and Nikhil for the podcast. मंडळ आभारी आहे |
@@yj9032 The Judiciary is also quite dumb when it meddles into Religion and starts legislating from the bench. It says that SC can pass judgements where there is no law. I suppose then they should start contesting elections and be accountable rather than behaving like dictators. The Judiciary needs to be kept in check so as to avoid judicial activism and legislation. We should never have a system where the 'Judge can do no wrong' like 'The King can do no wrong'.
Mr. Mehra can you please tell me the ratio in the Basic Structure Case. Judges must stay in their domain, Parliament will be checked by the people. A society that doesn't want to be free or isn't capable of protecting its freedom, can't be saved by any judiciary. Indira was finally defeated by the people, while the Supreme Court failed. Colonial mindset at its finest, telling that Indian people are not capable of governing themselves.
If indira deleted elections than what ? We have no 2nd amendment to fight. Our police will not revole if they can do partnership with gov. Only military will be last hope but that didn't work out against Indira
@@DhruvPatel-zg1zs bro true we don't have guns, still we defeated the most advance guns of the time "British" government, now if we have to decide things based on conjectures let's take another example. Today the world is globalised and in this globalised world no govt. however powerful can hold the people despotically, without opposition(and guns are available easily once you need them, naxals got guns when they wanted, tamils got gun when they wanted, Kashmiris still have AK 47s etc.) So I would say freedom is based on will of the people and not on some text. Further to add I am not against entrenched provisions, but they must be established by the people and should be fixed and not abstract. And judges should not indulge in politics by interfering with the democracy. Finally to end it, Justice Kehar stated in the NJAC verdict that "that Indian society is not ready for democracy", same statement was made by British Colonists when the enslaved us for our own betterment. A people are never perfectly ready for liberal democracy, but if the Constitution says that they are ready we must believe it. So Democracy is basic of the basic structure. Supreme Court should not be allowed to diminish the will of the people, the will should reign supreme. They can elaborate rights and that is fine and I don't have any problem with that.
Say, the parliament someday deletes the fundamental rights. Is it still mandated by the people? If yes, then what kind of consciousness are we talking about, at first place?
@@aayushhh95 the only thing I am saying is that SC won't be able to do anything if the society starts considering the current system of rights as illegitimate. Coming to your question, Fundamental Rights must be sacrosanct, democracy, life and equality must be entrenched in the constitution, so that no one could change them without a revolution. But that does not mean that SC can declare anything and everything as basic structure and create useless systems like the system of judges appointing judges. Even Pakistan has a better system for appointing judges. Now you would ask why it is bad, so it is bad because unaccountable power leads to corruption, and judge are humans and therefore prone to corruption. For example CJ Lahoti appointed 22 judges from his caste, nepotism is quite rampant, so we need a better system. The only time a FR was removed it was due to popular pressure(Right to Property), right to life and Habeas Corpus were protected by the same parliament in post Indra year, when the judiciary passed ADM Jabalpur Case. Further to add, only if we respect democracy we will have it, otherwise aristocracy will take over. So Basic Structure must be declared by the people and not by some judge, like it was done in Germany.
Kushal bhai you need to be attentive and listening to the person when he is speaking. Not only is that being disrespectful to him, but you as the host have the duty to ask questions on behalf of the audience. You missed several junctures where pertinent questions could have been asked. You fiddling with the mouse and phone makes this podcast unwatchable.
I think Kushal was very much participative at all times.. Maybe he was looking for audience questions? Please be considerate of the things that a host needs to manage..
Govt had no financial resources to compensate property owners. It could have imposed heavy taxes on same property owners and confiscated property in lieu of huge amount of tax due 😀😀
I've been listening your podcast that you uploaded in Spotify on sikh vs pakistani, and it seems you're kinda baised, and satirical. As if you don't want to listen rather exert your opinion which is absolutely in favor of khalistani. No hate for anyone. But your favouritism should not be so discernable.
@@DhruvPatel-zg1zs waise emergency provisons se elections delay kiye ja sakte hai par mujhe nahin lagta amendment se election cancel kiye ja sakte hain.
@@vb5251 actually that's highly unlikely. Any political party strives to win and expand its electoral base so they would try not to upset the majority. England bina judicial review ke itna acha kaam kar raha hai na.
I can't describe how much i appreciate the podcasts with Nikhil.... Absolutely fabulous
I began watching from Kushal's perspective and at the end I was convinced by Nikhil.
At the end of the day it comes down to the organs of the state behaving with precedent and respect for the Constitution. If one of the organs of the state transgresses into the other we do not have a democratic state with checks and balances.
US and UK have legislatures where they regulate their own behaviour so as to avoid becoming banana republic. It is unfortunate that politicians in India were incapable of moderating their behaviour and so the SC had to step in.
I am still not convinced of the Judicial appointments and Collegium system. Looking forward to a podcast on this issue.
Thanks a lot Kushal and Nikhil for the podcast. मंडळ आभारी आहे |
If government starts appointing judges then we can say goodbye to democracy. The judiciary will turn into another lap dog like cbi and ED.
@@yj9032 The Judiciary is also quite dumb when it meddles into Religion and starts legislating from the bench. It says that SC can pass judgements where there is no law. I suppose then they should start contesting elections and be accountable rather than behaving like dictators.
The Judiciary needs to be kept in check so as to avoid judicial activism and legislation. We should never have a system where the 'Judge can do no wrong' like 'The King can do no wrong'.
Next please discuss the issues with judicial appointments.
To Nikhil Sir. If Supreme Court does not have the power to enforce, how did they get away with Collegium system? ?
Mr. Mehra can you please tell me the ratio in the Basic Structure Case. Judges must stay in their domain, Parliament will be checked by the people. A society that doesn't want to be free or isn't capable of protecting its freedom, can't be saved by any judiciary.
Indira was finally defeated by the people, while the Supreme Court failed. Colonial mindset at its finest, telling that Indian people are not capable of governing themselves.
abe bc election tak wait karenge kya ? if your freedom is gone than f the all system and get ready
If indira deleted elections than what ? We have no 2nd amendment to fight. Our police will not revole if they can do partnership with gov. Only military will be last hope but that didn't work out against Indira
@@DhruvPatel-zg1zs bro true we don't have guns, still we defeated the most advance guns of the time "British" government, now if we have to decide things based on conjectures let's take another example. Today the world is globalised and in this globalised world no govt. however powerful can hold the people despotically, without opposition(and guns are available easily once you need them, naxals got guns when they wanted, tamils got gun when they wanted, Kashmiris still have AK 47s etc.) So I would say freedom is based on will of the people and not on some text.
Further to add I am not against entrenched provisions, but they must be established by the people and should be fixed and not abstract. And judges should not indulge in politics by interfering with the democracy.
Finally to end it, Justice Kehar stated in the NJAC verdict that "that Indian society is not ready for democracy", same statement was made by British Colonists when the enslaved us for our own betterment. A people are never perfectly ready for liberal democracy, but if the Constitution says that they are ready we must believe it. So Democracy is basic of the basic structure. Supreme Court should not be allowed to diminish the will of the people, the will should reign supreme. They can elaborate rights and that is fine and I don't have any problem with that.
Say, the parliament someday deletes the fundamental rights. Is it still mandated by the people? If yes, then what kind of consciousness are we talking about, at first place?
@@aayushhh95 the only thing I am saying is that SC won't be able to do anything if the society starts considering the current system of rights as illegitimate. Coming to your question, Fundamental Rights must be sacrosanct, democracy, life and equality must be entrenched in the constitution, so that no one could change them without a revolution.
But that does not mean that SC can declare anything and everything as basic structure and create useless systems like the system of judges appointing judges. Even Pakistan has a better system for appointing judges.
Now you would ask why it is bad, so it is bad because unaccountable power leads to corruption, and judge are humans and therefore prone to corruption. For example CJ Lahoti appointed 22 judges from his caste, nepotism is quite rampant, so we need a better system.
The only time a FR was removed it was due to popular pressure(Right to Property), right to life and Habeas Corpus were protected by the same parliament in post Indra year, when the judiciary passed ADM Jabalpur Case.
Further to add, only if we respect democracy we will have it, otherwise aristocracy will take over. So Basic Structure must be declared by the people and not by some judge, like it was done in Germany.
Sage bhai mil gaye
Very good .... Do more with him on polity
Love this Mehra-thon !
Excellent podcast! So were the ones on the Ayodhya case..
Kushal bhai you need to be attentive and listening to the person when he is speaking. Not only is that being disrespectful to him, but you as the host have the duty to ask questions on behalf of the audience. You missed several junctures where pertinent questions could have been asked. You fiddling with the mouse and phone makes this podcast unwatchable.
You are right. He should introspect.
Kushal typing on his phone while Nikhil is speaking is sort of disrespectful.
I think Kushal was very much participative at all times.. Maybe he was looking for audience questions? Please be considerate of the things that a host needs to manage..
He is neech.
You are right. He should introspect.
Govt had no financial resources to compensate property owners. It could have imposed heavy taxes on same property owners and confiscated property in lieu of huge amount of tax due 😀😀
I've been listening your podcast that you uploaded in Spotify on sikh vs pakistani, and it seems you're kinda baised, and satirical. As if you don't want to listen rather exert your opinion which is absolutely in favor of khalistani. No hate for anyone. But your favouritism should not be so discernable.
Places of worship act encore
Not revolution but elections will remove the governing party which brought drastic changes so need for the unelecteds to interfere.
haha agar government ne election hi bandh kar diye to ?
A lot can go wrong in the 5 years between elections in such a case
@@DhruvPatel-zg1zs waise emergency provisons se elections delay kiye ja sakte hai par mujhe nahin lagta amendment se election cancel kiye ja sakte hain.
@@vb5251 actually that's highly unlikely. Any political party strives to win and expand its electoral base so they would try not to upset the majority. England bina judicial review ke itna acha kaam kar raha hai na.
Acts like wake and Hindu regions places act etc cannot be passed ad these are not secular.
Even Hindu code bills is non constitutional?