In Article 370 Verdict, Supreme Court Left Unanswered An Important Issue Of Federalism : Ex-SC Judge Justice Ravindra Bhat

On Saturday, retired Supreme Court judge Justice S Ravindra Bhat remarked that the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution did not address the crucial matter of federalism.

"The Court spoke through unison through three judgments. It left unanswered an important issue on federalism," Justice Bhat said about the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench in the case In Re : Article 370 of the Constitution.

While upholding the abrogation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 of the Constitution, the Court did not answer the issue of whether the Parliament could downgrade a State into a Union Territory. Without answering this issue, the Court took on record an assurance given by the Solicitor General that the statehood of J&K would be restored and elections would be held, though no timeline was specified.

Justice Bhat was speaking at the Constitution Conference, 2024 held by Nalsar University of Law, Hyderabad. The conference underlined the significance of “Contemporary Constitutionalism” in India.

In Article 370 Case, Supreme Court Set A Worrying Precedent For Federalism

Taking a lead from the theme of the conference, Justice Bhat started his lecture by referring to the Demonetization Case, where the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Demonetization exercise done by the Government and RBI.

Justice Bhat recounted the relevance and importance of asymmetric federalism propounded in the Judgment of Govt. of NCT of Delhi v Union of India to underline how a different Union Territory may engage in a relationship with the Union depending on the treatment it receives in the constitution. He also urged to read out the triple chain accountability test evolved by the Supreme Court.

Further, Justice Bhat highlighted the Maharashtra Assembly case, and the electoral bond case in redefining the contemporary constitutionalism by the Indian Judiciary.

He also referred to the Anoop Baranwal Judgment, where the Supreme Court has interjected a consultative mechanism for the appointment of independent election commissioners through the interpretive process.

“This trend of examining and revisiting our norms long held to be dearly values is not necessarily disheartening but is to be seen as court probing considering the changes necessarily to be made and to make the constitution responsive, efficient and relevant in the 21st century.”, Justice Bhat Said.

“We find similar resonances in the neighborhood where laws are questioned and held up against the constitutional norms to see if they are valid and measure up to the standards of our times and in a continuum of the dynamic society a new meaning has to be given to the old norms and whereby needed carve out newer interpretations.”, Justice Bhat added.

Justice Bhat outlined the importance of interpreting the old laws in a new fashion with the evolving society.

Lastly, Justice Bhat flagged the concerns posed by Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in dictating the social change in the country.

“Now we live in an age of technology and machine learning where AI-enabled and generative AIR products have crept into our lives. These challenges several traditional notions of the personhood, creativity, data-based policy, privacy, and public opinion. It is time that we all put our thinking hats to collectively refashion norms to meet these challenges which are profoundly dictating social change.”, Justice Bhat said.

With these remarks, Justice Bhat ended his lectures.

Also from the event :

Governors Must Discharge Their Duties In Accordance With Constitution : Justice BV Nagarathna

Common Man's Predicament Due To Demonetisation Stirred Me, So I Had To Dissent : Justice BV Nagarathna