Behind BJP MP's 'Crossing Limits' Jab, Supreme Court's Tamil Nadu Verdict

The remarks by BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma targeting the Supreme Court have drawn a sharp attack from the Opposition. AIMIM chief and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi has slammed the Godda MP and said Prime Minister Narendra Modi must stop those threatening the courts. Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh has accused the Centre of trying to weaken the Supreme Court. The ruling BJP has distanced itself from Mr Dubey's remarks and termed them "personal statements" that the party "completely rejects".

The criticism of the Supreme Court by a section of BJP leaders comes weeks after the top court's landmark judgment that effectively set a three-month deadline for the President and the Governors to clear Bills passed by the legislature for the second time.

What Nishikant Dubey Said

Speaking to the news agency ANI, BJP MP Dubey said Parliament must be shut down if the Supreme Court makes all decisions. "The top court has only one aim: 'Show me the face, and I will show you the law'. The Supreme Court is going beyond its limits. If one has to go to the Supreme Court for everything, then Parliament and State Assembly should be shut," he said.

Referring to the top court verdict decriminalising homosexual relations between consenting adults, the BJP MP said, "There was an Article 377 in which homosexuality was a big crime. The Trump administration has said there are only two sexes in this world, either male or female... Whether it is Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh, all believe that homosexuality is a crime. One fine morning, the Supreme Court said we abolish this...," he said.

"When the Ram Mandir, Krishna Janmabhoomi, or Gyanvapi issue arises, you (Supreme Court) say, 'Show us the paper'. But for mosques built after the Mughals came, you are saying how will you show papers? The Supreme Court is responsible for inciting religious wars in this country. It is crossing its limits."

Mr Dubey also asked how the Supreme Court can set a deadline for President and Governors to clear Bills. "How can you give direction to the appointing authority? The President appoints the Chief Justice of India. Parliament makes the law of this country. You will dictate Parliament?"

BJP leader Dinesh Sharma said no one can "challenge" the President, as the President is "supreme". "There is an apprehension among the public that when Dr BR Ambedkar wrote the Constitution, the rights of the Legislative and Judiciary were clearly written... According to the Constitution of India, no one can direct the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. The President has already given her assent to it. No one can challenge the President, as the President is supreme," he told ANI.

BJP Distances Itself

The BJP brass has distanced itself from its leaders' remarks targeting the Supreme Court. The two MPs, Mr Dubey and Mr Sharma, have been asked to refrain from such statements.

BJP president JP Nadda took to X to clear the party's stand. "The Bharatiya Janata Party has nothing to do with the statements made by BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Dinesh Sharma on the judiciary and the Chief Justice of the country. These are their personal statements, but the BJP neither agrees with nor supports such statements. The BJP completely rejects these statements."

Mr Nadda added, "Bharatiya Janata Party has always respected the judiciary and gladly accepted its orders and suggestions because, as a party, we believe that all the courts of the country, including the Supreme Court, are an integral part of our democracy and are a strong pillar of the protection of the Constitution."

The party chief said both MPs and others in the party have been instructed against making such remarks. "I have instructed both of them and everyone else not to make such statements," he wrote.

Asaddudin Owaisi's 'Tubelight' Jab

In a sharp counter to Mr Dubey's remark, AIMIM chief Owaisi said a Supreme Court judgment is the law. "You are tubelights, you are thumbs-up... You are threatening the courts? Article 142 of the Constitution (which gives the Supreme Court special powers) was brought by BR Ambedkar. Ambedkar was more far-sighted than you," said the barrister who studied at Lincoln's Inn in London.

Addressing Prime Minister Modi, he said, "Your people are so radicalised that they are threatening the courts. Modi ji, if you do not stop these people who are threatening, the country will weaken and the country won't forgive."

Congress's Jairam Ramesh said the BJP leaders are trying to weaken the Supreme Court. "Constitutional functionaries, ministers, BJP MPs are speaking against the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is saying that when a law is made, you should not go against the basic structure of the Constitution. If the law is against the Constitution, we will not accept it... The Supreme Court is being targeted because in many issues, like electoral bonds, the Supreme Court has said that what has been done by the government is unconstitutional," he said.

The Verdict At Centre Of Row

At the centre of this debate over the Supreme Court's powers is an April 8 judgment by the bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan. Deciding a Tamil Nadu government's petition against the Governor withholding assent to Bills, the court effectively set a three-month deadline for the President and Governors to clear Bills passed by the legislature for the second time.

The court also said that only courts have the prerogative to provide recommendations regarding the constitutionality of a Bill and the Executive is supposed to exercise restraint in such matters. It said it would be prudent for the President to refer Bills with constitutional questions to the Supreme Court.

Multiple reports have said the Centre is planning to file a review petition to the top court judgment, which effectively curtails the powers of the President, and by extension the Council of Ministers, which advises the President.

"It is expected that the Union executive should not assume the role of the courts in determining the vires of a bill and should, as a matter of practice, refer such question to the Supreme Court under Article 143. We have no qualms in stating that the hands of the executive are tied when engaging with purely legal issues in a bill and only the constitutional courts have the prerogative to study and provide recommendations as regards the constitutionality of a bill," the court said.

The order said an opinion rendered by the Supreme Court under Article 143 of the Constitution -- Article 143 grants the President the power to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court -- holds "high persuasive value" and "should ordinarily be accepted by the legislature and the executive". "We are no strangers to the arguments as regards the non-binding nature of the advisory jurisdiction of this Court and that even though a bill may be referred to this Court by the President under Article 143, yet the opinion delivered thereunder may not be heeded to. However, merely because the jurisdiction under Article 143 is not binding does not undermine the principles used by this Court to determine the constitutionality of the bill," it said.

The Vice-President Targets Top Court

The BJP leader's attacks on the top court were preceded by Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar's strong words against the judiciary. Mr Dhankhar, a senior lawyer, said the President is a very elevated position and takes the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. "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. President being called upon to decide in a time-bound manner, and if not, becomes law. So we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super-parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because law of the land does not apply to them," he said.

"We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There, it has to be five judges or more... Article 142, Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against Democratic forces, available to judiciary 24 x 7", he said about the provision granting special powers to Supreme Court.