In Indian democracy people elect government and so the governments have the legitimacy of people. The elected governments have the power to make laws and take administrative decisions which come under its ambit according to the constitution. From the very definition of democracy elected governments draw the authority to ‘administer the people’ from the people itself. So this concludes that the elected governments gain defacto (real or original) power in the subjects it is entitled to. The real power is attained from the feature “democracy” itself. So stripping a government of defacto powers of popularly elected government by higher government who enjoys dejure (nominal and legal) powers is against democracy.
In Delhi people elected government so that they will be ruled by it. If the government of Delhi do not have the defacto powers in its sphere then what is the use of electing it by people. As it is elected by people Delhi government draws the authority from the people who have elected it and not by the debate whether it is union territory or state.
Constitution i) allows minimal coordination in the whole nation, ii) specifies who has the power to make decision in a society, iii) limits the power of government, iv)fulfill the aspirations of society and v) expresses the fundamental identity of people(Indian). Constitution of India draws its legitimacy from people as they consensually accept it.
Delhi High court has pronounced a verdict that Delhi being union territory the final authority rests with lieutenant governor. This interpretation is reflection of constitution specifying who has the power to make decisions but not reflecting the people’s legitimacy on it. This is an interpretation of constitution rather than the aspirations of people from whom the constitution draws it’s authority from. People of Delhi wanted to be ruled by a government of their choice(in the subjects it is entitled to do). People of delhi have elected a government to rule them for 5 years. Constitution says they are to be ruled by some other (LG) whom the people of Delhi have never endorsed. Here constitution is against the wishes of people. As lieutenant governor is taking over defacto power in every decision of government it reflects that he is against the wishes of the people. This results in decrease of legitimacy of constitution by the people. It is not good for the nation to take the authority on the people by saying constitution has granted me to rule over you. This is belittling constitution. Let democracy prevail.
In Delhi people elected government so that they will be ruled by it. If the government of Delhi do not have the defacto powers in its sphere then what is the use of electing it by people. As it is elected by people Delhi government draws the authority from the people who have elected it and not by the debate whether it is union territory or state.
Constitution i) allows minimal coordination in the whole nation, ii) specifies who has the power to make decision in a society, iii) limits the power of government, iv)fulfill the aspirations of society and v) expresses the fundamental identity of people(Indian). Constitution of India draws its legitimacy from people as they consensually accept it.
Delhi High court has pronounced a verdict that Delhi being union territory the final authority rests with lieutenant governor. This interpretation is reflection of constitution specifying who has the power to make decisions but not reflecting the people’s legitimacy on it. This is an interpretation of constitution rather than the aspirations of people from whom the constitution draws it’s authority from. People of Delhi wanted to be ruled by a government of their choice(in the subjects it is entitled to do). People of delhi have elected a government to rule them for 5 years. Constitution says they are to be ruled by some other (LG) whom the people of Delhi have never endorsed. Here constitution is against the wishes of people. As lieutenant governor is taking over defacto power in every decision of government it reflects that he is against the wishes of the people. This results in decrease of legitimacy of constitution by the people. It is not good for the nation to take the authority on the people by saying constitution has granted me to rule over you. This is belittling constitution. Let democracy prevail.
No comments:
Post a Comment