Supreme Court Rules Constituent Assembly Recommendations Not Binding on President

December 11, 2023 | Aditya Raj Kaul

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) made a groundbreaking statement today, declaring that the recommendations made by the constituent assembly are not binding on the President. The CJI emphasized that the constituent assembly was never intended to be a permanent body and operated only during a period of transition.

The CJI’s remarks came during a hearing on a case where the legality of a decision made by the President, which was in contrast to a recommendation put forth by the constituent assembly, was being questioned. The CJI clarified that once the constituent assembly ceased to exist, the special condition under which it operated also came to an end.

The constituent assembly was established in 1946 with the purpose of drafting the Constitution of India. It comprised representatives from various political parties and communities, tasked with formulating a framework for the newly independent nation. However, it was always intended to be a temporary body, operating solely during the transition from British colonial rule to an independent India.

The CJI’s statement puts to rest the long-standing debate on whether the President is obliged to follow the recommendations made by the constituent assembly. Over the years, there have been conflicting interpretations of the assembly’s role and the binding nature of its recommendations. This ruling by the Supreme Court provides much-needed clarity on the matter.

Legal experts have welcomed the CJI’s remarks, stating that it aligns with the original intent of the constituent assembly. They argue that the assembly’s purpose was to guide the drafting of the Constitution and not to create a lasting authority over the President’s decisions. With the assembly disbanded after completing its task, its recommendations can no longer be considered binding.

However, some critics have voiced concerns about the potential implications of this ruling. They argue that it may undermine the authority and importance of the constituent assembly’s recommendations, which were carefully deliberated upon and considered by the framers of the Constitution. They fear that future Presidents may use this ruling as a basis to disregard the assembly’s valuable insights.

It is important to note that the CJI’s statement does not diminish the significance of the constituent assembly’s work. The assembly’s recommendations continue to hold historical and academic value, serving as a vital reference point for understanding the intent and vision of the framers of the Indian Constitution.

This ruling by the Supreme Court marks a significant milestone in the interpretation of the Constitution and the role of the constituent assembly. It reaffirms the temporary nature of the assembly and provides clarity on the binding nature of its recommendations. Moving forward, it will be interesting to observe the impact of this ruling on future cases involving the President’s decisions and the relevance of the constituent assembly’s contributions.

The CJI’s remarks have sparked a renewed interest in the history and significance of the constituent assembly. Scholars and experts are revisiting the debates and discussions that took place during its sessions, shedding new light on the complexities involved in the drafting of the Indian Constitution.

As the country reflects on this landmark ruling, it is crucial to recognize the evolving nature of constitutional interpretation and the need for a balanced approach that respects both the intent of the framers and the changing dynamics of governance.

.

#BREAKING: CJI says: Recommendation of the constituent assembly was not binding on the President. Constituent assembly was never intended to be permanent body and it was to operate in a period of transition. When the constituent assembly ceased to exist, the special condition for…

— Aditya Raj Kaul (@AdityaRajKaul) December 11, 2023

Source

@AdityaRajKaul said #BREAKING: CJI says: Recommendation of the constituent assembly was not binding on the President. Constituent assembly was never intended to be permanent body and it was to operate in a period of transition. When the constituent assembly ceased to exist, the special condition for… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

RELATED STORY.