By the book

After a season of excess and excitability, the prime minister’s assertion of constitutional propriety was welcome. In recent months, public discourse has been roiled by a series of corruption scandals, and to add to that, some of the solutions suggested by civil society champions of the Lokpal bill have been rash and potentially destabilising. The PM spoke up for the Constitution, and the importance of preserving the inbuilt set of checks and balances that operate upon all branches of government. A Lokpal conceived along maximalist lines would disrupt this arrangement, giving them unprecedented power over executive decisions, and encroaching on the independence of the judiciary.

At the PM’s meeting with the press, he shared his views on many of these questions, and came out firmly on the side of institutional decorum — whether it was on the CAG’s overreach, the media’s role or his belief that the higher judiciary should be kept out of the Lokpal’s ambit. Abiding by the constitutional framework is not a matter of choice — it is what keeps our democracy ticking. The separation of powers is hardwired into our democracy, the principle that no limb of government will be able to subordinate the other. The legislature chosen by the people enacts laws and oversees their implementation, the executive gives practical shape to this legislation, and the judiciary interprets the Constitution to make sure these branches function right.

Justice A.P. Shah has observed that the draft Lokpal bill “seeks to create a gigantic institution that draws its powers from a statute that will be based on questionable principles”. While judicial accountability is certainly needed, it must not interfere with the higher courts’ capacity to pronounce on complex matters, as the PM stressed. He also said that while he was personally open to the Lokpal’s scrutiny, the question was about the dangers of eroding the authority of the office, and the decision would have to be made politically. Most importantly, he brought a measure of level-headedness to the corruption rhetoric, saying there were no magic wands and insta-solutions. Corruption must be combated, but not by upending or disregarding democratic processes and institutions. The Constitution is our founding document, one that constrains and guides our legislature, executive and judiciary, and its procedures cannot be flicked away to make way for supra-institutions. The PM has injected some much-needed balance into the debate, and he must continue this reasonable conversation.