Apex court steps in as govt was unable to take a decision for four years
Prasanna Mohanty | May 9, 2012
In the past couple of years, the union government has been accusing the apex court of stepping into the executive’s domain and making policy decisions on its behalf. This act of the court is described as “judicial overreach”.
There is little to dispute this but to understand why so, we need to look at the latest court verdict.
On Tuesday, the apex court asked the government to phase out Haj subsidy in the next ten years. The court said the rising cost of the Haj pilgrimage was not only draining the exchequer the subsidy (about Rs 600 crore a year) could be better used to improve the lot of the community - by way of better education, health and other facilities.
Ideally, it should have been the concern of the executive. The executive should have taken appropriate action. But look at what minority affairs minister Salman Khurshid said after the verdict was delivered.
Welcoming the decision, he told reporters: “The issue of Haj subsidy has been already under consideration for over the last four years and discussions had taken place for rollback of Haj subsidy.”
Two things are clear from this: (a) the government discussed the issue and was inclined to roll it back but (b) it couldn’t take a decision for the past four years.
What was it that prevented him from doing the obvious for so long?
You would be mistaken for thinking that a rollback would have hurt the community’s sentiments. Four years ago, a working group of Muslim MPs had demanded scrapping of the subsidy and had even suggested an institutional mechanism like the one in Malaysia which helps pilgrims to save money and provides facilities for them.
Ever since then, community leaders, including clerics, have been publicly seeking withdrawal of the subsidy, saying that it was never an issue, nor was it ever sought by the community.
So, what stopped Khurshid?
Call it policy paralysis or political vacuum. The fact remains that the UPA II is increasingly finding it difficult to take decisions.
The court is merely filling that vacuum. Can one blame the court for that?
And more than that, the court is even correcting the government when it takes rank bad decisions – be it in the case of appointment of CVC, allocation of 2G spectrum and others – and refuses to act against those holding high offices in the face of mounting evidence.
The Art of Conjuring Alternate Realities: How Information Warfare Shapes Your World By Shivam Shankar Singh and Anand Venkatanarayanan HarperCollins / 284 pages / Rs 599 Professor Noam Chomsky, linguist and public intellectual, has often spoken of &ls
The brutal second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in India has left a significant death toll in its wake. Health experts advise that the imminent third wave can be delayed by following simple measures like wearing a mask and engaging in social distancing. However, near the end of the second wave, we witnesse
Union Minister of Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari has emphasised deciding driving hours for truck drivers of commercial vehicles, similar to pilots, to reduce fatigue-induced road accidents. In a Na
In a step towards Telecom Reforms which aim to provide internet and tele connectivity for the marginalised section, the Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communica
Raising concerns over rising seawater levels and climate change, Mumbai First, a 25-year-old public-private partnership policy think tank, has written letters to Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray, minister for environment and climate change, tourism and protocol, Aditya Thackeray and Mumbai munic
After the recent announcement of the government guarantee for Security Receipts (SRs) to be issued by a public sector-owned National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd (NARCL), there is a surge of interest around this desi version of a super bad bank. The entity will acquire around ₹2 trillion bad debts fr