Article 370 Case : Live Updates From Supreme Court [Day 6]

Dave: To be giving this kind of power to a majoritarian government would be destruction of rule of law.

Dave: Tomorrow it may happen that my party cannot get elected in 'A' state. I will disintegrate it in UT? Because there is law and order problem? This is something to be seriously considered. It is not a one time exercise. It has ramifications on future of India

Dave: Of course there is insurgency. Noone can deny that. But then we have insurgency in so many states in North East India. We had insurgency in Punjab for a long time. If we were to start disintegrating states into UTs, no state would be saved.

Dave: Then they say what we have done is because of national interest. Noone knows what this national interest is because it hasn't been defined in the counter affidavit.

Dave: Government of India categorically admits this- that Constituent Assembly of J&K did not, in any manner, deviate from the provisions of the Constitution of India which would be applicable to J&K.

Dave: To do this, it really strikes at a very basic feature of our constitution - democracy, federalism.

Dave: 356 is a temporary provision. It is a temporary situation. Can you take actions which are permanent in nature?

Dave: Parliament takes controls over executive and legislative functions. Then you say President will exercise all powers into one. Then you pass orders under 370.

Dave: What more classic example of abuse of power than this?

Dave: You have a government in association with a local party in J&K. It is working well. You suddenly withdraw the support from that government. Then you persuade the President to issue a 356 order. Then you persuade President to issue a resolution of assembly.

Dave: Your lordships in DC Wadhwa's case have said that you cannot exercise constitutional powers to achieve political ends.