Personal animosities not conducive to forging consensus: Kumar

Noting that political discourse rooted in personal animosities is not conducive to forging national consensus on vital issues, Congress leader Ashwani Kumar said today that present discourse does not serve well the libertarian goal of the Constitution.
Kumar, during the launch of his book 'Hope in a challenged democracy: An Indian narrative', said that there is no doubt that the Supreme Court has over the years become the "co-governor" of the nation and asserted that the accountability of government policies must remain with the Executive.
Talking at length during the book launch, the former Union minister also said that there is a need to revisit the anti-defection law as he was against party whips that curb the right for against consensual dissent.

"We know that the political discourse rooted in personal animosities is not conducive to the forging of national consensus on vital issues that confront the nation. A political culture which regards ideological opponents as enemies ill-serves our democracy.
"We can be political opponents or ideological opponents but we cannot in the process become enemies for life. The kind of discourse we see in our country, does not serve well either the libertarian goal of the Constitution.
"One of the great challenges of accountability in a democracy is we must learn to civilize ourselves in the use of power and that is one of the messages which I have tried to convey in the book," he said.

He said he has tried to underscore issues in the book like libertarian democracy can be strengthened without compromising the goals of the Constitution.

He also rued the fact that many of the important issues are not discussed in Rajya Sabha and said all political parties need to sit down and formulate a yardstick which are not bound by immediate politics.
On party whips, he said, "I am against party whips that curb the right for against consensual dissent."
Referring to the case of impeachment of Justice Sen in Rajya Sabha, he said it was "nothing less than legislative murder. I have talked about revisiting the whole theory of party whips."

Citing recent examples in Uttarakhand, Kumar said that while the anti-defection law has served its purpose, there is a need to try to structure the law so that it is not used to stifle dissent in larger public interest.
Asked about the judiciary's role in taking decisions on alcohol ban and the executive's decision on meat ban and other such issues, he said that as far as constitutional equilibrium of power is concerned, there is deviation from the scheme of the Constitution.
"Where on one hand I have said that SC has expanded the purview of human rights, I would also say that there are many issues, which do not have any relation to SC," he said.

Noting that the SC says they were taking decisions as the Executive and the Legislature has failed in doing, Kumar said that the SC has to exercise self restraint so that the delicate balance between the three pillars remain.
"I have argued that for how long will the people have faith in the court that has lost faith in their leaders. There is no doubt, over the years the SC, as somebody said has become the co-governor of the nation which it has no purpose to.
"At the end of the day, the accountability for government policies must rest with the executive which is accountable to the representatives of the people in Parliament and that has been the original intent of the constitution and there is no reason to depart from it," he said.

Referring to the NJAC case, when the court equated the independence of the judiciary with the primacy of the chief justice, he said that he was the first one one to say that this is a flawed equation.
"Independence of the judiciary is certainly the basic structure of the constitution but that argument cannot extend to giving primacy to the chief justice," he said.