Critically discuss section 89 of the constitution with reference to case law. the discussion must include a comprehensive analysis of the rationale for section 89, the consequences of this section, as well as a discussion of how section 89 differs from section 102 of the constitution.


Question: Critically discuss section 89 of the constitution with reference to case law. the discussion must include a comprehensive analysis of the rationale for section 89, the consequences of this section, as well as a discussion of how section 89 differs from section 102 of the constitution.

Section 89 of the Constitution

Rationale

Section 89 of the Constitution of India provides for the establishment of an Independent Panel to investigate whether the President has committed gross violation of the Constitution or misconduct in office. The rationale for this provision is to ensure that the President, who is the head of state and the guardian of the Constitution, is accountable to the people. Section 89 also provides a safeguard against the misuse of the President's powers.

Consequences

If the Independent Panel finds that the President has committed gross violation of the Constitution or misconduct in office, it can recommend that the President be removed from office. The Parliament then has to decide whether to accept or reject the recommendation. If the Parliament accepts the recommendation, the President is removed from office.

Case Law

The Supreme Court of India has interpreted Section 89 of the Constitution in a number of cases. In the case of R.P. Luthra v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court held that Section 89 is a "powerful safeguard" against the misuse of the President's powers. The Court also held that the Independent Panel is a "quasi-judicial body" and its proceedings are subject to judicial review.

In the case of Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016), the Supreme Court held that the Independent Panel can investigate the President even for actions that were taken before he assumed office. The Court also held that the President cannot refuse to cooperate with the Independent Panel.

Differences Between Section 89 and Section 102 of the Constitution

Section 102 of the Constitution of India provides for the impeachment of the President. Impeachment is a political process that is initiated by the Parliament. The President can be impeached for gross violation of the Constitution or misconduct in office. If the President is impeached by the Parliament, he is removed from office.

The following are the key differences between Section 89 and Section 102 of the Constitution:

  • Initiation: Section 89 is initiated by the Chief Justice of India, either on his own motion or on the basis of a petition filed by a citizen. Section 102 is initiated by the Parliament.
  • Investigation: Section 89 provides for an independent investigation by an Independent Panel. Section 102 does not provide for any such investigation.
  • Removal: Under Section 89, the President is removed from office if the Parliament accepts the recommendation of the Independent Panel. Under Section 102, the President is removed from office if he is impeached by the Parliament and convicted by the Supreme Court.

Critical Discussion

Section 89 of the Constitution is a powerful safeguard against the misuse of the President's powers. However, it has been criticized by some for being too weak. For example, the Independent Panel does not have the power to subpoena witnesses or documents. Additionally, the President is not required to cooperate with the Independent Panel.

Another criticism of Section 89 is that it is too difficult to remove the President from office. The Independent Panel must find that the President has committed gross violation of the Constitution or misconduct in office, and the Parliament must then accept the recommendation of the Independent Panel. This is a high bar to meet, and it is unlikely that the President will ever be removed from office under Section 89.

Despite its limitations, Section 89 remains an important safeguard against the misuse of the President's powers. It is a reminder that even the President is not above the law.

Conclusion

Section 89 of the Constitution of India is a powerful safeguard against the misuse of the President's powers. It provides for an independent investigation into any allegations of gross violation of the Constitution or misconduct in office. If the Independent Panel finds that the President has committed such an offense, it can recommend that the President be removed from office. The Parliament then has to decide whether to accept or reject the recommendation.

Section 89 differs from Section 102 of the Constitution in a number of ways. Section 102 is a political process that is initiated by the Parliament. It does not provide for an independent investigation, and the President is not required to cooperate with the Parliament.

Section 89 has been criticized by some for being too weak and for having a high bar for removing the President from office. However, it remains an important safeguard against the misuse of the President's powers.

Rjwala Rjwala is your freely Ai Social Learning Platform. here our team solve your academic problems daily.

0 Komentar

Post a Comment

let's start discussion

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Latest Post

Disclaimer

All information provided on this site is generated by artificial intelligence. If you find any content objectionable or have concerns about the information provided, please feel free to comment or contact us directly.