Emergency power is a grand final and crowning glory of the most reactionary chapter of the Constitution.” Comment.

Question: “Emergency power is a grand final and crowning glory of the most reactionary chapter of the Constitution.” Comment. [MS 1984]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [“Emergency power is a grand final and crowning glory of the most reactionary chapter of the Constitution.” Comment.]

Answer

The above proposition is given in the context of the criticism of the emergency powers of the President. The emergency powers vested in the President under Articles 352 to 360 of the Indian Constitution. When the provisions regarding emergency powers were passed by the Constituent Assembly, it had to face many criticisms on basis that the powers vested with the President are incompatible with a democratic country.

Article 359 of the constitution vests with the President an authority to suspend the right to constitutional remedies as described by a member of the Constituent Assembly as the “grand finale and the crowning glory of the most reactionary chapter of the Constitution”.

The national emergency as talked about can be proclaimed due to war, civil war, or external aggression was denounced by several critics as an artifice to abridge the liberties of the individuals. The main basis of the criticism lies in the very fact that the proclamation of emergency can be issued even before the occurrence of war or aggression. That’s why the critics denounce Indian democracy as a disguised dictatorship.

The case of N. Krishna Bliatta v. Mysore State draws more light in this respect where the Supreme Court in its ruling has further strengthened the position of the President in proclaiming an emergency. The court said the during an emergency, the president has the power to suspend all or any of the FRs.

To which Shri K. Subba Rao, ex-Chief Justice of India held a dissenting opinion and KM. Nambiar while arguing said that, “Emergency is a fraud on the Constitution.” They described it as an instrument to keep the citizens’ Fundamental Rights under eclipse. The suspension of the ‘right to freedom’ safeguarded under the constitution during an emergency is nothing but a vicious step to depriving the individuals of their legitimate rights and usher in an era of a totalitarian regime in our democratic country.

Further, Article 356 dealing with emergency arising due to constitutional breakdown in a State, was also subjected to severe criticism in the Assembly which stated that the President need not wait for the report of the Governor and take action on his own initiative or even command a governor to manipulate breakdown of law and order in the State and ask for the President’s rule. Also, the failure on the part of a State to comply with any direction, given in the part of a State in a lawful exercise of the Executive Power of the Union, is also regarded as the failure of the constitutional machinery in the State and entitles the President to supersede the State Government.

Therefore, it is not surprising why these emergency powers followed many criticisms by the members of the constituent assembly. It was apprehended that the President would be made instrumental in the hands of the ruling party to dismiss any ministry constituted by the opposition party, if in power in a state.

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
2. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
3. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-II
4. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IV
5. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-V
6. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VI
7. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VII
8. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
9. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IX
10. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-X