Date: 15/05/2023

Relevance: GS-2: Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary—Ministries and Departments of the Government.

Key Phrases: Article 371, Accountable Governance, differential treatment, B.R. Ambedkar and the S.R. Bommai judgment, Union Territories, Decentralization of Power, Special Autonomy.

Context:

• Justice Chandrachud emphasizes recognizing regional aspirations to strengthen unity and uphold democracy.
• Refutes the "one nation, one government" approach.
• Acknowledges the legitimacy of Delhi's elected representatives to govern the city.

Key Highlights of the Judgment:

• Representative and Accountable Governance:
  • The Supreme Court's judgment on bureaucracy control in Delhi reaffirms the principle of representative and accountable governance.
  • People's consent empowers the central government to govern the country, not specifically Delhi.
  • Post-Emergency, the Supreme Court sought to regain public confidence through Public Interest litigation.
  • Positive Changes in the Supreme Court: Recent changes in the Supreme Court, with a new Chief Justice, have led to a visible shift towards upholding the Constitution and civil liberties.
• Constitutional Renaissance: The Delhi judgment contributes to a potential "constitutional renaissance."
• Asymmetric Federal Model and the Delhi Judgment :
  • The judgment addresses the asymmetric federal model of governance.
  • The bench opposes the Centre's control over services, aligned with the 2018 Constitution Bench decision.
  • Extensive quotes from the 2018 decision support the current judgment.
• Spirit of the Constitution and Unique Status of Delhi :
  • The judgment upholds the "spirit of the Constitution" and the sui generis nature of the Delhi model.
  • It recognizes the diversity of UTs and the need for differentiated treatment.
  • Unity in diversity and the accommodation of regional aspirations are fundamental constitutional principles.

Several constitutional principles support the accommodation of differences and specific requirements of different regions in India:

• Unity in Diversity:
  • The Indian Constitution recognizes and celebrates the concept of "Unity in Diversity."
  • This principle acknowledges the coexistence of various cultures, languages, and religions within the country.
  • It emphasizes that the country's unity is strengthened by recognizing and respecting the diversity of its regions and their aspirations.
• Federalism:
  • The Indian Constitution establishes a federal structure of government, wherein power is divided between the central government and the states.
  • Federalism allows for regional autonomy and decision-making authority, ensuring that different regions can address their specific needs and concerns.
  • It promotes a sense of ownership and participation among regional governments and their citizens.
• Special Autonomy Provisions:
  • The Constitution provides for special autonomy provisions under Article 371 for certain states.
  • These provisions recognize the unique historical, cultural, and social circumstances of these regions and grant them specific rights, privileges, and safeguards.
  • Special autonomy provisions accommodate the differences and requirements of these regions, ensuring their distinct identity and promoting their socio-economic development.
• Asymmetric Federalism:
  • The principle of asymmetric federalism recognizes that not all states or Union Territories (UTs) are the same.
  • It acknowledges that some UTs may have legislative assemblies and executive powers, similar to states, while others may not.
  • Asymmetric federalism allows for differential treatment and governance structures based on the specific circumstances and aspirations of each region.
• Decentralization of Power:
  • The Constitution encourages decentralization of power through local self-government institutions such as Panchayats and Municipalities.
  • These institutions empower local communities to address their specific needs and participate in decision-making processes.
  • Decentralization ensures that regional aspirations and requirements are given due consideration at the grassroots level.
• Fundamental Rights and Equality:
  • The Constitution guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, including the right to equality and non-discrimination.
  • Recognizing and accommodating regional aspirations is essential to ensure that all citizens have equal opportunities and access to resources, irrespective of their regional backgrounds.
  • Upholding the principles of equality and non-discrimination supports the accommodation of regional differences and promotes inclusivity.

Implications of the Supreme Court's Recent Judgment:

• Protection of federalism:
  • The judgment reinforces the principle of federalism by recognizing the distinct status of Union Territories (UTs) with a legislative assembly.
  • It establishes that UTs with their own legislative assembly, like Delhi, have executive powers that extend to all matters on which their legislative assemblies can make laws.
  • This recognition safeguards the federal structure of India by granting autonomy and decision-making powers to UTs, thereby strengthening the concept of cooperative federalism.
• Asserting the co-equal status of states:
  • The judgment reaffirms the co-equal status of states and the Union.
  • It rejects the notion that UTs are subservient to the central government or mere appendages.
  • By relying on the principles enunciated by B.R. Ambedkar and the S.R. Bommai judgment, the Court upholds the idea that states have sovereign powers that are exercised within their respective domains.
  • This interpretation maintains the balance of power between the Union and the states, promoting the spirit of federalism.
• Recognition of regional aspirations:
  • The judgment recognizes and acknowledges the importance of regional aspirations in strengthening the unity of the country.
  • It emphasizes that recognizing and respecting regional aspirations through representative governance is a key aspect of democracy.
  • This recognition enhances the participatory nature of the democratic process and ensures that the diverse interests and voices of different regions are taken into account while making decisions.
• Strengthening representative government:
  • The Court's decision supports the functioning of representative government by affirming the rights of elected representatives.
  • It asserts that the elected representatives in Delhi, who have a legitimate constitutional mandate and explicit consent of the people, should have the authority to govern the city.
  • This strengthens the principles of representative government and underscores the importance of elected representatives in decision-making processes.
• Ensuring accountability and welfare:
  • The judgment promotes accountable governance by emphasizing the need for the services in Delhi to be under the control of the elected government.
  • This decision ensures that the welfare of the people and the triple chain of accountability (between the government, bureaucracy, and citizens) can be maintained effectively.
  • It reinforces the principle that elected representatives are responsible for the governance and well-being of their constituents.
• Restoring public confidence:
  • The judgment contributes to the constitutional renaissance by restoring public confidence in the judiciary.
  • It showcases the Court's commitment to the principles of constitutionalism, the rule of law, and the protection of democratic institutions.
  • By addressing concerns related to the control of bureaucracy in Delhi and delivering a unanimous verdict, the Court helps rebuild trust and confidence in the judiciary's role as a guardian of the Constitution.

Conclusion:

• The Supreme Court's Delhi verdict has the potential to usher in a constitutional renaissance in India.
• By recognizing the importance of regional aspirations, upholding representative governance, and emphasizing the spirit of democracy, the Court has strengthened the unity of the country.
• Delhi must be governed by its elected representatives. In two different electoral processes, “we, the people” express our will.
• Unless the services in Delhi are brought under the control of Delhi’s elected government, the welfare of the people cannot be assured and the triple chain of accountability cannot be maintained.
• Let Delhi’s elected representatives now demonstrate austerity, honesty and the constitutional values that would contribute to the much-needed constitutional renaissance.
• They must remain consistent on federalism and support other regional autonomy battles.

Source: The Indian Express

Mains Question:

Q. Analyze the implications of the Supreme Court's recent judgment on the issue of who controls the bureaucracy in Delhi for the principles of federalism and representative government in India. (250 Words).