The Supreme Court has given a directive to the President, calling for a decision on pending bills within three months. This move highlights the judiciary’s responsibility to ensure that the executive arm of government acts within reasonable limits.
Background
The President’s approval or disapproval of bills passed by Parliament is significant in the legislative process. Nevertheless, undue delays in decision-making can undermine the effectiveness of essential laws, affecting governance and people’s lives.
Implications
The Supreme Court ruling emphasizes the need for prompt decision-making in the legislative process. By establishing a deadline, the Court seeks to avoid long delays and ensure the President acts within a reasonable period.
Key Considerations
Separation of Powers: The directive issued by the Supreme Court calls into question the balance of power between the judiciary and the executive.
Legislative Process: The ruling underscores the need for effective decision-making in the legislative process so that laws can be enacted and implemented at the right time.
Governance: The impact of this directive on governance could be far-reaching, as prompt decision-making is critical to the effective implementation of policies.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court directive to the President to rule on bills pending in parliament within three months is a testament to the judiciary’s commitment to keeping the executive within reasonable bounds. The event has potential far-reaching consequences for governance as well as the legislative process ¹.