Listen to the bench

After the heat, some light. The decision of the Group of Ministers to abide by the orders of the Supreme Court indicated some wisdom on the part of the executive in the handling of a contentious and extremely telegenic issue. Good governance is always tested in the heat of the moment. It would have been tempting, and politically opportune, for the government to have struck a defiant note when confronted with Monday8217;s Supreme Court order that the sealing drive must continue, given the raised passions elsewhere in the Capital. But these issues can never, must never, be settled on the streets.

The Supreme Court chose to stay the course. It was wholly in the right to observe that street agitations and violence cannot be a credible reason for government inaction; that it is the obligation of the government to ensure compliance of the orders and directions of the court, an obligation inherent in Articles 141 and 144 of the Constitution; and that no one can be permitted to place a dagger on the neck and seek relief from the court. Our democracy, let us remember, rests on the fine balance between the judiciary, the executive and the legislature. If any one of these entities chooses to act unilaterally and in its own perceived self-interest, they would be doing a disservice to the Constitution and Indian democracy as a whole.

We hope, therefore, that the executive is not tempted 8212; or indeed coerced 8212; into convening special sessions of Parliament, or passing laws and placing them in the Ninth Schedule to give them immunity from the court. We have said this before, and we say it again: the sealing controversy, vexed as it may be for the government of the day, can and should only be settled in tandem with the court.