[Editorial Analysis] Justice deferred

Mains Paper 2: Polity
Prelims level: Not much
Mains level: Judicial review of the internet services in Jammu and Kashmir

Context:

• The Supreme Court order on Monday declining pleas for restoration of 4G internet services in Jammu and Kashmir is disturbing for several reasons.

• The continued denial of such services in the lockdown constitutes a special injustice to a people deprived of fundamental freedoms since the Centre’s August 5, 2019, decision to abrogate Article 370 — the present 2G service is not enough for children to access online classes, or for patients to consult doctors, or for businesses dependent on online transactions.

Delay and evasion:

• But the SC order is also troubling because it appears to be part of a broader pattern of delay and evasion, and passing the buck, in cases that touch upon fundamental rights and crucial policy issues — in ways that amount, effectively, to giving the political executive the benefit of the doubt.

• Monday’s order, for instance, does not just contain no-questions-asked references to “national security” and “compelling circumstances of cross-border terrorism”, it also cedes the court’s own powers of judicial review to a special committee headed by the Union Home Secretary, which will examine the contentions of the petitioners as well as the “appropriateness of the alternatives” suggested by them.

• other words, the apex court has held that another body, consisting of secretaries of the very departments whose orders are in question, should adjudicate on the validity of the restrictions on people’s freedoms imposed by them.

A delicate balance is must:

• There is no doubt that in Jammu and Kashmir, imperatives of national security need to be factored in, a delicate balance must be struck. But the process of doing so must be both judicious and judicial.

• More generally, while executive assessments are a crucial input, they cannot be the only, or unquestioningly, the last word, in cases that involve constitutional principle and law.

• By throwing the ball on internet access back to a government-led committee, and by its delay in taking up cases of habeas corpus in Kashmir, the court has given the executive a free pass, instead of acting as a check and balance on executive power.

Conclusion:

• The apex court is the custodian of fundamental liberties and the fiercely independent upholder of the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

• That it should be seen to display a lack of urgency on important cases where the executive needs to do the explaining is disappointing and dispiriting.

———————————————

Prelims Questions:

Q.1) With reference to the NSafe mask, consider the following statements:

1. An IIT Delhi startup ‘Nano safe Solutions’ has launched an antimicrobial and washable face mask ‘NSafe’.

2. It has 99.2% bacterial filtration efficiency (at 3 microns) and complies with ASTM standards of breathability and splash resistance.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Answer: C

Mains Questions:

Q.1) There is no doubt that in Jammu and Kashmir, imperatives of national security need to be factored in, a delicate balance must be struck. Critically comment on the statement.

Subscribe to Get Weekly updates

Get daily current affair video, detailed current affairs PPT for quick revision and Free One Liner PDF directly in your inbox. Subscribe now to get this month's one liner for FREE.