Wed May 07 03:00:00 UTC 2025: ## Indian Vice President’s Remarks on Judiciary Spark Debate
**NEW DELHI, May 7, 2025** – The recent comments made by Indian Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar regarding the Supreme Court’s role have ignited a significant debate about the balance of power between the judiciary and the executive branches of government. Dhankhar’s assertion that judges are acting as a “super parliament,” exceeding their constitutional authority, and are unaccountable under the law, has drawn sharp criticism.
In a detailed analysis published today, C.B.P. Srivastava, President of the Centre for Applied Research in Governance, Delhi, argues that Dhankhar’s statements are deeply concerning and misrepresent the constitutional framework. Srivastava contends that the Supreme Court’s setting of deadlines for presidential and gubernatorial assent to bills is entirely consistent with upholding popular sovereignty, not an overreach of power. He further refutes Dhankhar’s claim that judges are not subject to the law, emphasizing that the Constitution itself vests judicial powers and outlines mechanisms for removing judges for misconduct.
Srivastava highlights the principle of separation of powers, noting that while the judiciary is independent, its authority is defined within the Constitution. He emphasizes Parliament’s ability to amend laws to address judicial decisions, underscoring the ultimate authority of the people’s representatives. The author concludes that such pronouncements from high-ranking officials risk undermining democratic institutions and calls for a more measured approach to navigating the complexities of India’s constitutional order. The debate underscores ongoing tensions between different branches of India’s government, raising crucial questions about the interpretation and application of the country’s constitution.
First Piper 