What kind of President India needs?

'My View of Strong President of India where from you can get and if I answer the following questions, you may get views of Septuagenarians overall perspective on President of India '

True Strong President can inspire us to stand up for all sections of the people, what says Amartya Sen seems sensible Why?

The President of India has an elevated standing as head of the Republic, and should be a voice for sanity and fairness, says Amartya Sen, Nobel laureate and economist. In the run-up to the presidential election, he answered questions via email on the role of the President in a secular and federal democracy. An enlightened President has many things to do, but being a 'rubber stamp' is not one of them, he says.

At a time when sections of society are apprehensive about the secular credentials of the government at the Centre and there is criticism from abroad that religious freedom is under threat, what should be the role of the President in guiding the government and its policy? Should the President be activist by nature, or confine herself to the customary, constitutional role as a titular head of state?

I Say, -
'Rights are no good unless you can enforce them ; and it is in their enforcement that English law has shown its peculiar genius. Lord Denning.

'English law respecting the freedom of the individual has been built up from the procedure of the courts : and this simple instance of priority in point of time contains within it the fundamental principle that, where there is any conflict between the freedom of the individual and any other rights or interests, then no matter how great or powerful those others may be, the freedom of the humblest citizen shall prevail over it' . says Lord alfred Denning.

Indian Constitution follows same British Constitutional Principles as our founders of the Constitution of India did adopt same British Parliamentary Democracy, with sound reasons only, not crazily, every Indian politician of India, past, present and future ought to knows my entreaty.

Besides, Indian Constitution founding fathers adopted other main advanced Constitutions-American, Irish ' fundamental rights' , Canadian and Australian besides the USSR constitutions with important leanings on these constitutional principles, not without common sensical reasons.

So we ought to know the British Parliament never crossed its limitations after it came into existence after restoration of Oliver Cromwell, even today British parliament dutifully obeys, when so , why don' t follow that every president of India has to question every PM and his cabinet , more dutifully, as Indian constitution is a glorious version of the very Government of India Act 1935, every Indian Constitution expert knows.

When so, why can' t the President of India cannot follow those British Parliamentary system , which never ever modified the Magna Carta signed by King John of England or any Bill of Rights - how come we Indians allowed these political scoundrels modify the basic Indian Constitutional tenets inspite of Art 368, these scoundrels even attempted to strike down Art 13 - fundamental right - the basic root of the Indian fundamental rights - even Mr Nehru obliged these scoundrels at parliament when he inserted the schedule IX in the first constitutional amendment - making a bar on courts when the parliament passes a statute that bars the judicial interference - indeed , thanks to CJI Mr. Y K . Sabharwal constitutional bench in 2007 declared schedule IX ' ultra vires' in LR Coelho vs of Tamil Nadu , thankfully, just honouring CJI K Subbha Rao constitution bench in Golaknath v Union of India, just allowing first 13 statutes and disallowed others, meaning , these political scoundrels tried their best to mangle the Indian Constitution by the very First constitutional amendment, not that they didn't know the impact of Art 368 - obviously worst scoundrellism is played in that time, every President of India to be need to know.

When you know that CJI Mr S R Das (FB) (1951) in Champakkam of Madras held that Art 368 doesn't' t allow any legislature to affect the fundamental rights of all, thus it set aside the so called Madras Government Order proviging reservations in medical and engineering colleges, though Chanpakkam was not a beneficiary but that fought for the principles of Indian Constitution - as British Indian government played with ' divide and rule policy in India to weaken the unity of Indians in Indians as such, for obvious benefits of alien British Rule.

You could have noted in the impeachment of Warren Hastings, Edmund Burke British MP in the British Parliament very vociferously impeached Mr Warren Hastings for his behaviour in Begams of Oudh issue, speaks volumes of British Parliament, in which Indians could have impeached Mr Ramsay MacDonald the British PM when he played ' divide and rule' among the Indians - obviously Indians being suffering from slavish mentality just played ' second fiddle, see your great Mr. Bhakta Vatsalam and others in Madras government promoted the division among castes thanking advantage of untested ' caste principle' just upset the ' unity in diversity' of India, we all know.

Indian politicians since Madras government were political scoundrels is obvious, every Indian need know; same perpetuated by Mr. VP Singh, as PM. for his own personal reasons brought about the Mandel commission to life though it is full of baffling statistical falsehoods that earned Mandel report to be shelved by the PM Mr Morarji Desal who only appointed for academic reasons, Mr Mandel to head that so called commission - indeed we had a sincere straight forward man in Mr Morarji Desai, a like of Sardar Vallabbhai Patel.

Why other politicians follow their footsteps -VP Singh' s likes, footsteps for all of them ' stock of political scoundrels' , they allowed so many innocent lives lost in agitation against Mandel Report - judiciary just became spectator as it followed the so called hapless, ' Judicial Restraint' then, all Indians need know - why because, if you do not root out the beginning the sprouts would damage the roots of independence of the country - that effect you se even today - ' sexual violence in Haryana today - reported on 6 June 2017 - ' after raping the mother crooks throw away 9 month old baby from auto Riksha' as reported' - that way political scoundrellism playing its dirty head today.

You had so many Nirbhayas cases, yet no improvement as such , as political scoundrellism in India is the ' demon ' even today after about 70 + yrs of independence, that president of India to be ought to know and wring all those political scoundrels in the garb of MPs ibn parliament today ; if not he is some ' Rubber stamp' man only ;

if we want ' some rubber stamp man as president - we don' t need that institution at all, unless it asserts its independent role not working with some so called ' judicial restraint ' in his office is the paradigm that is high lighted here in India at all.

President ought to be one to take head on any PM and his cabinet in India, as also CM sand his cabinet in In Indian states -else things would go out of control, only scoundrel thrive like some new breed of terrorists, ;

One ought to know that way every Indian ought to know - this knowledge might force citizens as voters would ask that they will elect president from an election out of the contestants nominated by parties from non party public that way some restoration of peoples' power would surface -

Else India would follow the recent happenings on Egypt of Husseini Mubharak or Col Gadaffi of Libya - if not some Syrian condition might emerge as is in Syria today, foreign governments like that of US or Russia would just use the opportunity to advance their own policies, that may not be good to Syrians or any others of like kind.

One should be able to understand the very basic tenets of the Constitution of India and very important articles - Art 124(4), 368, 156, and all the three Lists - Union, state and concurrent as is guaranteed by the constitution ' sans' all constitutional amendments - for the country could be run without these absurd ' constitutional amendments' -

See Japan Constitution so far no amended is a cynosure to one and all so too American constitution of 300 yrs or so standing has to its credit only 27 Constitutional amendments just because it was only a 18 page Constitution with basic ideas of democracy.

Indian politicians being mostly of 'Genre of scoundrels' tried to change basic feature of the Indian Constitution of India -

So the more the President has to have guts to question propriety of any ordinance is placed before him so too constitutional amendments if suggested by the union cabinet, for he is the basic protector of the Rights of Man - irrespective any decent or origin, else he would be gloriously call Rubber Stamp President like Rubber stamp PM we had in Dr Manmohan Singh -

And that he simply made the country to reel under too many ' scandals' (still the scandals is being tried), perpetrated by the Congress men , as also every ally of the government in his term of full ten years in the UPA I and the UPA II, time, if any, needs know - how political scoundrellism worked in those ten years of rule.

Therefore obvious, President by all means question and cross question even PM though he is elected man of the people - elected man doesn't' t subscribe to the view his views are accepted by every citizen , as elections by number of votes he got as an MP in his constituency not from the length and breadth of ' India, one ought to know - as most MPs assure all kinds of things as per Manifesto circulated by the parties that had helped thast MP win that constituency.

Obvious it shows clearly the largest party MPs in the Parliament - Lok Sabha elects its leader that man turns out to be your so called PM - like Dr Man Mohan Singh or Mr. Modi - there is ' No guarantee' the PM is the most trust worthy man of the people at large but just that party MPs only - any MPs is obviously some scoundrel - as polices is the last resort of any scoundrel' that is all the world accepts - so Alexander Pope' s maxim world over lauded.

When you know some politician of some largest party in parliament is elected by school of that party Scoundrels in the form or guise as MPs, obvious they would always tout their personal wishes, rather the wishes of the over all people - as elections are subjected to rigging' too.

From the above read, you will know same kind of scoundrels in the garb or guise or form of MLAs in all states would be there - that means as much political scoundrels of the country at=re going to be in president electoral college is obvious fact,

Like in the USA, you might have noted , when any politician turned lawyers might get chance to become Judges of the USCA or USSC, but you will see there, once that politician becomes a judge , he or she removes his or her political clothes on him or her, when he or she assumes office of judge, the said judge obviously would not blindly support his affiliated party earlier he was committed is just out of his court - unless ' its' (that group politicians - RP or DP) stand through its

Attorneys ought to convince the Hon. court of its position, if not that party advocacy loses there as it happened recently in the case of president Mr. Trump' s ' Travel Ban' as institutions rule their (man' s ) mind is obvious - see Mr. Tramp' s idea of walking away from Paris climate accord is objected by his own very secretary of State whom he cannot replace so easily as his white house staff, so too USSC judge(s), as per president' s whims and fancies; thought kind of tight control is there in the USA so that we call USA believes in ;We the People' - Liberty of man as such - that way only our Supreme court stood the test , perhaps CAG, RBI to name a few.

Office of president in 'India - like Dr Rajendra Prasad , Dr Sarvepally Radhakrishnan , Dr. Zakir Hussein stood the pressures of PMO and acted reasonably independently and thereafter Dr APJ Mr. Venkitraman, Mr. K Narainan, Dr. Abdul Kalam, and partially by Pranab Mukherjee as he followed ' rule book' so he is called ' rule book' president - like a judge working with some ' judicial restraint' (Judicial restraint should not over touted as what ….. , after all there is difference between the right word and almost different - is some thong like lightning and a lighting bug ' as Mark Twain said.

Therefore , Judicial restraint need to be understood in the same way as Mark Twain observed - the difference between lightning and lightning bug' that means Hon'ble constitutional courts in India need not give ' over credence' on judicial restraint on all statutes of the law makers is obvious fact - that way was born the Art 142 to empower the Apex court to reorder trial on Babri Masjid issue - and now Shri Advaniji, Murali Manohar Joshi and Ms. Uma Bharati and others that way is established the ' judicial review ' mechanism is.

That way the President elect or to be elected need to emphasize the importance of his independent role as the direct protector of the rights of people India here ,in this process he may over throw the advice of PMO or his cabinet so that rights of people are restored - that means political scoundrellism is arrested like a Brahmastram is what ancient India respected as a ' Lakshmana rekha' (a limitation line) doctrine on all - if anyone robs in one way or the other of the normal rights of any ordinary man - may be a beggar but he is a citizen of India under Art 5, why is he a beggar just because of these political scoundrels only - None Else.

With the above preamble of introduction of topic of president , i answer the following questions as if I am asked to respond, by all media of India,.

What sort of candidate would you endorse? Will you prefer someone with an independent mind, someone who will not be a ' rubber stamp' , or someone who will take a strict, constructionist view of the Constitution and abide by its letter?

Any man is very bold to question any power if it goes wrong -

-that way you, as President can and ought to just ' keep under control these Executive Government of ' political scoundrels' at bay; he needs to see ' Common sense in any ordinance proposed so too in any constitutional amendment - the president needs to ask the proposer can't you run with the normal articles of the Constitution if so explain logically why you can' t if you can' t better drop your proposal as the Nation need to be handled first as per constitutional proprieties.

That kind of man may not be found among politicians mostly - as each politician would support the other as Quid Pro Quo' arrangement, that is scoundrellism.

' The task is one of getting the right balance. The freedom of the individual, which is so dear to us, has to be balanced with his duty; for, to be sure every one owes a duty to the society of which he forms part. ' , says Lord Denning

I say , get some one , who may not have any following like a politician; - for politicians have followers just because they say all 'untruths' (false promises) is the cup of politicians;
and some that gives ' that way' (even all false), so many may follow them;
but here President is to look after - all that is honest men , honesty is with poor man whose number is the largest any where that way citizens are born as a boon.

- So Christ said:
' A camel can enter the eye of a needle not the rich man can enter Kingdom of Heaven' ; not Christ never assessed men (on the basis who is rich not in mind and not in heart)-
' poor man needs no roof, he can sleep happily under the roof of sky he doesn't' t need tower buildings, never needs too much moneys as he needs to eat like a man ' eat to live but not live to eat ' ,

what Benjamin Franklin said - if you eat to live , you don' t need to store food, like rich and wealthy -' storing obvious is against the nature order' ;

Clothing that much you can afford, it is like ' costly thy habit as thy purse can buy ' as is said by Polonius (Danish PM of Hamlet) when he sends his son Laertes to Sorbonne University in Paris in then France.

Politicians being greedy they need mansions like in ' North or South' Avenues, with too many servants while wasting all kinds of resources at the cost of tax payers - even poor man contributes by way indirect taxes to these lavish habits of these scoundrels - why they need ' cars' , ' could they not travel or go by ' bicycles' or just public transport system' , like in the Scandinavian countries -

' Example is better than precept' what Mahatma Gandhi said.

If politicians do not set right things by their own frugal habits, how the hell these scoundrels have temerity to control other common man -
These scoundrels only make the people to be ' greed' centered -
So that , these ' scoundrels launder'

- President ought question when MPs salaries are raised - he should ask why the salaries and allowances at all, - 'Could no he be living on- either being ' curtailed or reduced' ?
- Such man as President can only can control these political scoundrels.

President ought to ask why the government is not allowing the judiciary to appoint more judges - why you fellows hold up when the man on the street needs justice at all costs in most speedier way - they can' t wait ,;

' You as politicians cannot have any ' preferences to be heard first like senior citizens, or disabled , and women over, all the ' poor people' ;
That need to be governing principle, over riding, ' priority' :
' not the rich nor the wealthy man' ;

That is being done today -
Why you scoundrels need priority -
Is there any Articles in the Constitution that you need to be given priority over ordinary citizens?;

If so show the articles to me -
Then only ' all wasteful expenses' by and large can be avoided -

Any politician need to be ' taxed at double the rate of direct taxes' besides goods and services when he takes charge him double the indirect taxes on these worthies;

'That way you can discipline these political ' undisciplined scoundrels' called politicians.' Mr. President to be.

If you have that kind of verve and gut , naturally you are the right president of India, as a first qualification!

Given that the electoral college for electing the President of India is drawn partly from the State Assemblies, the President' s office has a federal character. Doesn' t this place an onus on the President to defend the rights of States? In practice, Presidents are often asked to endorse decisions adverse to State governments: for instance, imposition of Article 356 and appointment of Governors without consulting Chief Ministers. What should the role of the President be in such situations?

Federal government cannot play ' Monkey and Butter ' story with States as they have their own rights under ' State Lists' not all state lists can be brought under ' concurrent list' federal govt need to realize. - step one

Why Constitution of India made lists not without mind?

Yes, if States go wrong , President can seek reports from the chief secretary of the State as also from the cabinet secretary of Union government as also from PMO from PM' s secretary- then the PM himself independently - why only from PMO all kind of reports be given in his volition only why not by demand from president?

If PMO has to give its own views why there is CMO in States and why Cabinet secretary or chief secretary after all they are the Executive service officers can send reports through Governors duly vetting the reports, not as political representatives of the party in power at the centre?

If this happens, naturally some distortion ,coloring happens that should be avoided at all cists after al ' information' can never be distorted under any logic of governing, that President need to insist upon. Else central government may play all wrong things - see today PMO wants in TN EPs and OPS factions together to help BJP nominee as president - that is shibboleth , such things by all means avoided - EPS and OPS faction joining is their business that is not the business of PMO; if not, obviously PMO wants some one to be as some kind of Rubber stamp president , such things ought to be avoided at all costs - India needs ' independent' President not ' rubber stamp' of PMO; people can revolt if rubber stamp president is appointed by Present PMO by its so called electoral college of president - today allies of PMO only cannot over ride opposition of PMO, that means if opposition views are scuttled it is obvious there is some ;quid pro quo with new incumbent to be as President - ,like biggest Rubber stamp e.g. PMO - obviously such election need be set aside by the Apex Ct under Art 142 - if Apex court doesn' t use Art 142 naturally it is obvious Apex Court uses ' judicial Restraint' - indeed Judicial restraint cannot be there if there is some Rubber stamp president takes over - for that kind of office of President might tilt the balance of peoples rule in favor of some party rule that ought to be set aside;

Else people might rebel, rebellion of people is not a good sign in a democracy where independence of institutions ought to be respected, if not there s democracy at all but some politico crazy of some parties in power , that need to be set aside by very president himself if that man though nominated by the party in power, he should take his own independent views in favor of large majority of people which need to take care of minorities rights too - so have the office of president - so he she ought to be literally independent not like Mr. Trump of the USA he ought to be guided by his or her advisors other than the PMOs advisors.

The task is one of getting the right balance.

The freedom of the individual, which is so dear to us, has to be balanced with his duty; for, to be sure every one owes a duty to the society of which he forms part. So the President too.!

What qualities should a President have?

He should be bold and gutsy man to question if any activity of the governments in centre or states do go wring.

We don' t need cowards - Indians largely have a 125 crores people of which you can' t get one independent President - so one needs to agree in political scoundrels play havoc just use Art 156 remove such party government suo moto by the very president himself with governors of states right royal accountability with loyalty to the office of president.

In our time they have been counterbalanced by the duty to use one's property and powers for the good of society as a whole. That is to be ensured by the president of India is my view.

 

Published in Constitutional Law
Views : 219
Other Articles by - dr g balakrishnan
Report Abuse









×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu

web analytics