Constitutional Clash: Sibal vs. Dhankhar on Judicial Authority

The debate intensifies between Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal and Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar over the supremacy of constitutional authority. Sibal argues for the Constitution's supremacy, while Dhankhar criticizes the judiciary for overstepping its bounds. The controversy revolves around a Supreme Court directive for timely presidential decisions on Bills.

A fierce debate has erupted between prominent political figures Kapil Sibal and Jagdeep Dhankhar over the limits of constitutional authority in India. Sibal, a Rajya Sabha MP, asserted on social media that the Constitution is the supreme authority, not Parliament or the executive.

Tensions flared after a Supreme Court ruling outlined a timeline for the President to address pending Bills, prompting criticism from Dhankhar. Speaking at Delhi University, Dhankhar warned against the judiciary acting as a 'super Parliament,' suggesting that constitutional offices remain impartial.

Sibal responded robustly, emphasizing the Supreme Court's role in interpreting the Constitution. He defended the court's actions as consistent with national interest and rebuked Dhankhar's criticisms as a misunderstanding of democratic principles.

(With inputs from agencies.)