Sibal Slams VP Dhankhar Over Judiciary Remarks: ‘Unconstitutional, Undignified, and Politically Charged’

New Delhi: Rajya Sabha MP and senior advocate Kapil Sibal on Friday delivered a scathing critique of Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar for his recent remarks targeting the judiciary, asserting that such statements are “unconstitutional” and diminish the neutrality expected from the Rajya Sabha Chairman.

At a press conference in New Delhi, Sibal expressed shock and disappointment at Dhankhar’s comments questioning the judiciary’s role in setting timelines for the President to act on bills, and accusing the Supreme Court of acting as a “super Parliament.” Dhankhar had earlier said, “So, we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super Parliament and absolutely have no accountability because the law of the land does not apply to them.”

Reacting strongly, Sibal said, “I have never seen any chairman of the House make political statements of this nature. Even BJP chairmen in the past have not done so.” He emphasized that the role of the Speaker and Chairman in both Houses of Parliament must remain equidistant from political factions. “No Speaker can be the spokesperson of any party. If it appears so, then the dignity of the chair is lowered,” he asserted.

Dhankhar’s criticism of Article 142 — which grants plenary powers to the Supreme Court to do “complete justice” — also drew a sharp rebuke from Sibal. The Vice President had referred to it as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces available to the judiciary 24×7.” To this, Sibal countered, “How can you say this? Article 142 is a constitutional provision, not one granted by the government. It is fundamental to the judiciary’s ability to uphold justice.”

Sibal further elaborated that constitutional functionaries must understand the structure of governance. “The President is a titular head and acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. The governor too must act accordingly. If a bill is passed by the legislature and sent back but passed again, the governor must assent as per the Constitution,” he clarified.

Raising concerns over executive inaction, Sibal asked, “Can a governor sit on a bill for two years when it affects the lives of people? This is intrusion on legislative supremacy. If the executive doesn’t do its job, the judiciary must intervene. That’s the essence of Article 142.”

Highlighting perceived bias in Dhankhar’s commentary, Sibal remarked, “He spoke about 1984 but skipped 2002. He mentioned the Emergency but ignored the undeclared emergency we’re witnessing today. He didn’t talk about institutional capture post-2014.”

Sibal concluded by stressing the fundamental importance of judicial independence to democracy. “What is being done is not neutral, it is not constitutional. The judiciary cannot defend itself, so the polity must stand up for it.”