00:00From Parliament to the streets to Supreme Court,
00:03all have turned battlegrounds at some point in the opposition versus CEC war.
00:08At the centre of the storm, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
00:12The opposition wants accountability.
00:14It's questioned the poll panel's functioning,
00:16raised concerns over voter list revisions,
00:18challenged the way electoral decisions are being taken.
00:21And so, they've gone to the Supreme Court.
00:24But the question we're attempting to answer is,
00:27can the judiciary act against the CEC?
00:30Well, yes, it can review his actions.
00:34But no, it cannot simply remove him from office.
00:38I'll explain that further.
00:40Under Article 32, the Supreme Court can examine
00:43whether the CEC's actions violate fundamental rights.
00:47Using its constitutional powers,
00:49the court can also strike down decisions
00:50that violate the constitution or the law
00:53and issue appropriate directions.
00:55Take SIR, for instance.
00:57It can examine whether the exercise follows the law.
01:00But that doesn't mean that it will automatically strike it down.
01:04Removing the CEC is a different ballgame altogether.
01:08Under Article 324, Clause 5,
01:11the CEC can be removed only on the same grounds
01:15and through the same process as a Supreme Court judge.
01:19Impeachment, essentially.
01:21The CEC can be removed only for proven misconduct or incapacity
01:25through a special parliament process
01:27and then a formal order by the President.
01:30In other words,
01:31to answer the question I started off with,
01:33the court can check the CEC.
01:35But it cannot sack the CEC.
01:38And so, that raises the bigger question.
01:40If the road to removal is so constitutionally difficult
01:43and indeed goes through parliament itself,
01:45why is the opposition taking its fight to the Supreme Court?
01:48Is it just about legal relief
01:50or is there a larger political battle playing out?
01:53Every courtroom battle, let's be very clear,
01:56has a political afterlife
01:57and provides great optics narratives as well.
02:00I'll run you through some of the opposition's past legal battles.
02:04The Rafale case,
02:05the Supreme Court refused to order a court-monitored investigation in 2018.
02:08In 2019, dismissed the review petitions.
02:11In the PMLA case,
02:13a three-judge bench upheld the challenged provisions in July 2022.
02:17Review proceedings followed,
02:18showing that even an adverse judgment
02:20need not end a political or legal argument.
02:23But the opposition has also scored
02:25significant legal victories in the Epyx Court.
02:28The Supreme Court in February 2024
02:30struck down electoral bond scheme as unconstitutional,
02:34ordering disclosures that brought political funding
02:36under intense public scrutiny.
02:38Just last year,
02:39the Supreme Court ruled against Tamil Nadu Governor
02:41R.N. Ravi's handling of 10 repassed bills,
02:44delivering again a major judgment on gubernatorial powers.
02:49Different cases,
02:50different legal questions,
02:52but different outcomes.
02:53Approaching the Supreme Court
02:54doesn't guarantee that the opposition will get what it wants,
02:57but they raise a larger question.
02:59The opposition may be turning to the judiciary
03:02to settle battles that politics alone can't.
03:05The courts can intervene when the law or the constitution is violated,
03:09but they cannot become a substitute for parliament,
03:13for election commission or the political process itself.
03:16And every political dispute
03:18can't automatically become a judicial intervention.
03:22The fine line that the Supreme Court therefore must navigate right now
03:26is between judicial accountability and judicial overreach.
03:30The fine line that the law or the constitution of the constitution is virtually
