Tamil Nadu Finance Minister Palanivel Thiaga Rajan said on Saturday that the line between the judiciary, the legislature, and the administration had blurred a lot.

Releasing the book “Constitution of India - Is Not What It Is,” authored by Justice (retired) A.K. Rajan here, he said that today, one does not know where the line lies that separates the roles and responsibilities of the judiciary, the legislature, and the administration.

Arguing that the line between the legislature and the administration has already blurred, with things like the anti-defection laws, Mr. Thiaga Rajan said the line between the judiciary and the administration was now getting blurred in good and bad ways. While there is an overreach in some cases, there are also instances in which judges refuse to step into something that they should look into. Referring to the recent issue over a public interest litigation petition on freebies, he asked how that can be considered a justiciable matter.

He asked on what basis, in a democracy, can the court be appointed a chaperone between the electors and those seeking election. Highlighting that the book’s title was a reference to a quote of a former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court who said, “The Constitution is not what it is, but what the judges say it is,” Mr. Thiaga Rajan said that such an enormous responsibility of interpretation is laid on the shoulders of judges in any democratic society.

He said this responsibility is being used, neglected, and, in some ways, misused or put in cold storage in India. He said there are many cases with serious constitutional implications, and yet, not a single hearing has happened in the Supreme Court, or they are heard five or six years later when the hearing is effectively infructuous.

He added that, in India, such problems are compounded by the notion that one cannot criticise the judiciary, unlike in many other democracies. Pointing out that in many issues, there are multiple judgments contradicting each other, he recalled an inscription in a courthouse in New Jersey, which reads, “Precedent makes law; If you stand well, stand still.” He said it is to make the judges of the higher judiciary appreciate that every time they open their mouth or use their pen, they are validating or setting a precedent. “This notion of restraint, of truly checking precedents, of being wary of creating new precedents, I think, is becoming of a judge,” he said.

Justice (retired) Doraiswamy Raju stressed the need for judges to avoid bringing their personal preferences into their judgments. Ravivarma Kumar, senior counsel, Supreme Court, said that while the Kesavananda Bharati judgment is often referred to as a landmark, protecting the basic structure of the Constitution, the same judgment played a significant role in blurring the line between the judiciary, the legislature, and the administration.

Dravidar Kazhagam president K. Veeramani said the book, which was a timely contribution, ought to be translated into Tamil. A. Thiyagarajan, senior counsel, Madras High Court; G. Olivannan of Emerald Publishers; and P.B. Suresh Babu, advocate, Madras High Court, spoke.