Tuesday, May 21, 2024
Latest News
Aircraft about to land at Mumbai airport flies into flock of flamingos, at least 40 birds dead China National Nuclear Power starts work on nation’s largest offshore solar farm OpenAI uses Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT without permission: All details Haiti’s Gangs Grow Stronger as Kenyan-Led Force Prepares to Deploy Funerary procession to be held for late president in Iran's northwest | India News Saudi Arabia's national carrier orders more than 100 new Airbus jets 'It's not fair': Wasim Akram agrees with Irfan Pathan, slams ECB and England players for leaving IPL early | Cricket News Second Henrietta Lacks family lawsuit can proceed against pharmaceutical company, judge rules California Assembly passes bill allowing cannabis cafes Dibrugarh: Dibrugarh cracks down on unauthorised e-rickshaws | Guwahati News BTS’ RM, NewJeans, Aespa and Treasure to go head to head in the K-pop charts with a clutch of new releases 'He had never asked me a single question': Gautam Gambhir hails Shah Rukh Khan as 'best owner' | Cricket News Microsoft unveils AI-capable Windows PCs said to be faster than Apple’s MacBook Air 2024 showdown: Trump tops Biden in April campaign cash dash Check-Dam: Opposition Leaders Condemn Check-Dam Construction in Kerala | Coimbatore News Big IPOs seen making a comeback in India as stock boom continues TOI Health News Morning Briefing | FLiRT variants identified in Kolkata, Harvard study finds when to take aspirin during heart attack, simple tests to check purity of milk, FAQs on heat stroke answere... OpenAI pauses ChatGPT voice ‘eerily similar’ to Scarlett Johansson Scarlett Johansson Said No, but OpenAI’s Virtual Assistant Sounds Just Like Her Sean Hannity: This is not justice IMD: IMD forecasts heavy rain in 8 districts from Friday | Bhubaneswar News China’s GPS rival BeiDou prepares to take off as Beijing moves to strengthen home-grown satellite navigation Australia and New Zealand sending planes to evacuate nationals from New Caledonia's unrest Trump's social media account shares a campaign video with a headline about a 'unified Reich' Illegal Construction: Illegal construction in public park: HC directs Moradabad DM & police to act | Allahabad News Government norms to monitor quality of spices exports IPL 2024, Qualifier 1: Kolkata Knight Riders, Sunrisers Hyderabad look to put on a show | Cricket News Scarlett Johansson says that OpenAI approached her to use her voice Moose kills man trying to take photos of her newborn calves in Alaska Class 12 General Marksheets: Class 12 general marksheets distribution date in Gujarat | Ahmedabad News
HomeOpinionsOverly deferential: Supreme Court verdict on demonetisation

Overly deferential: Supreme Court verdict on demonetisation


It is an oft-repeated judicial view that courts must defer to the elected government’s judgment in matters of economic and social policy. Their interventions are usually limited to instances where executive decisions are palpably arbitrary or patently illegal. In this backdrop, it is no surprise that four of the five judges on a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court deferred to the government’s wisdom in dramatically announcing the move on November 8, 2016 to demonetise all ₹500 and ₹1,000 notes that were then in circulation. The scope of judicial intervention was only to examine the decision-making process, but the majority has given its uncritical endorsement to the process, terming it to be free of flaws. It has upheld the government’s power to demonetise notes without quantitative restrictions and accepted the claim that there was adequate consultation between the Union government, which initiated the proposal, and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). What might seem distressing about the majority verdict is that it has made light of the enormous suffering of the people that demonetisation entailed. While there are observations that recognise the possibility of hardship and that demonetisation may have ultimately been a failure, these are limited by context to say neither individual suffering nor errors of judgment can be cited to invalidate the action.

The majority has brushed aside substantial arguments based on proportionality, holding that demonetisation survives every test for proportionality: there was a legitimate purpose (unearthing fake currency and hoarded wealth and combating terror funding), there was a nexus between the action and the objectives, and the court did not have the expertise to suggest a less intrusive way of achieving these objectives. However, it does not properly address the question on whether the adverse consequences could have been limited. It is unfortunate that the court had nothing critical to say about the government failing to anticipate the ruinous effect of extinguishing the value of 86% of available currency on the economy and the immense miseries it heaped on the population. Justice B.V. Nagarathna’s dissent, holding the process to be flawed and the RBI’s approach to be without application of mind, is a consolation for those who want the courts to hold those in power to account. In a larger sense, of course, a judicial rap on policy questions matters little. But it might give governments cause for pause before implementing decisions with far-reaching consequences for the people.

To read this editorial in Hindi, click here.

To read this editorial in Malayalam, click here.

To read this editorial in Tamil, click here.

To read this editorial in Telugu, click here.



Source link

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular

Recent Comments

Latest News