Somnath sticks to his guns

'Will the Speaker be liable to submit to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?'

Although it was aimed at defusing a potential controversy that could have seen the judiciary pitted against the legislature, Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee revived the issue of the extent of powers of the judiciary over the legislature, by asserting that the Supreme Court ruling on the Jharkhand issue could not be cited as a precedent.

Technically, the Speaker is not in a position to tell courts what they can or cannot cite as a precedent.

Chatterjee was addressing a press conference at the end of a day-long conference of presiding officers of the legislative bodies here today. The conference was called by Chatterjee after the Supreme Court issued directives to the Jharkhand Assembly asking it to follow several steps in installing a government in the state. This was interpreted as an infringement of the rights of the legislature.

Chatterjee's argument was that the apex court's March 9 order could not be a precedent as it was an interim order passed ex-parte."I cannot expect the Supreme Court to pass an unreasoned judgment. I am sure it will not be treated as the law of the land. It is not a law declared by the Supreme Court as law of the land. It is just an interim order," he said.

Asked about some of the questions that he said had arisen out of the order on Jharkhand like whether the pro-tem Speaker attracted the contempt of the Supreme Court or whether the Jharkhand Assembly members were liable to follow the order and what was the remedy, Chatterjee said those questions only showed that the apex court order was "unimplementable".

"The solution to the Jharkhand matter came not from the court's order but by the executive decision of the Prime Minister," he claimed.

In his inaugural address, the Speaker posed a series of questions on the apex court order. "One would like to know whether the court had considered that if there was a violation of the order, would the Speaker or the members of the legislature have been held guilty of the contempt of the Supreme Court?"

"Would the judiciary have been able to deal with such a situation? Could the Speaker have been summoned before the Supreme Court for having exercised his authority under the Constitution? Would the Speaker be liable to submit to the jurisdiction of the apex court?" he asked.

Chatterjee also sought to know how would the members of the legislature be treated for an alleged contempt of the court?

"Would the Supreme Court have directed the arrest and detention of the Speaker and members of the Jharkhand legislature? Can a Speaker of any legislature be held answerable for not being able to transact the proceedings of the House if the members of the legislature indulge in indiscipline only with a view to disturbing the proceedings," Chatterjee asked.

These are all highly prov-ocative questions and Monday is likely to bring an answer from the Supreme Court. Clearly, it is not the end of a controversy, as the Congress had begged the Speaker to do, but the beginning of one.

Answering questions, Chatterjee said courts and legislatures were supreme in their areas as delineated in the Constitution.

"While legislatures should not cross the Laxman rekha (limits set in the Constitution), similarly, we feel all the organs of the Constitution should not cross their limits," he the Speaker said.

He said the presiding officers were not asking for "even an iota" of power or authority but were only insisting on respect for whatever had been given to them under the Constitution.

"We are not interfering with the powers of the Supreme Court. We cannot direct the Supreme Court to do anything, unless we are mad," he said.

The Speaker refuted a suggestion that he had demanded a presidential reference on the March 9 order pointing out that he had favoured it on the basis of the opinion of the preponderant majority at the all-party meeting.