* 'Executive cannot act independently of Parliament on nuclear deal'
*the hindu
13/09/07*
*http://www.hindu.com/2007/09/13/stories/2007091354511100.htm*
*

*Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer and Justice P.B. Sawant, former judges of the
Supreme Court of India, and Justice H. Suresh, former judge of the Bombay
High Court, have issued a statement on the powers of the Executive with
reference to the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. The statement is:*

1. The Executive has no power to enter into any agreement, either with a
foreign government or a foreign organisation, which is binding on the
nation. The agreement will be binding only when it is ratified by
Parliament. There is no provision in the Constitution which gives such
authority to the Executive. We have a written Constitution and, therefore,
we must have a written provision in the Constitution which gives such
authority to the Executive.

2. Articles 73 and 253 and Entries 6, 13 & 14 in the Union List of the
Constitution refer to the powers of the Executive. Article 73, among other
things, states that, "----the executive power of the Union shall extend (a)
to the matters with respect to which Parliament has powers to make laws, and
(b) to the exercise of such rights, authority and jurisdiction as are
exercisable by the Government of India by virtue of any treaty or
agreement." This means that the matters on which Parliament has no powers to
make laws are also matters on which the Union Government cannot exercise its
executive power. It also means, conversely, that the Union Government cannot
exercise its executive powers beyond the legislative powers of the Union.
Both these propositions have an underlying assumption that, before the Union
Government exercises its executive power, there is a law enacted by
Parliament on the subject concerned. Some argue that the provisions of
Article 73(1)(a) give power to the Executive to act on subjects within the
jurisdiction of Parliament, even if Parliament does not make a law on those
subjects. This is both a distortion and a perversion of the said provision
and a subversion of Parliament's supreme control over the Executive. If this
interpretation is accepted then the Union Executive can act on all subjects
on which Parliament has to make law, without there being any law made by
Parliament. You can thus do away with Parliament and Parliament's duties to
make laws. We will then have a lawless government. Democracy presumes there
should be a rule of law and all Executive actions will be supported by law
and that there shall be no arbitrary action by any authority, including the
Union Executive. It may also be necessary in that connection to remember
that it is for this very reason that when Parliament is not in session and,
therefore, unable to enact a law, the power is given to the President to
issue an ordinance (which is a law), so that the Executive may act according
to its provisions. These ordinances are to be placed before Parliament
within six weeks of its reassembly, and if Parliament approves they become
law. The Constitution-makers were, therefore, clear in their mind that the
Executive cannot act without the authority of law and it has no power
independent of law made by Parliament.

3. Article 253, which is relevant in the context of the present Indo-U.S.
nuclear deal, is very specific on the subject. It says, "Notwithstanding
anything in the foregoing provisions of this chapter, Parliament has power
to make any law ----- for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention
with any other country or countries or any decision made at any
international conference, association or other body."

This Article gives specifically the power to Parliament to make laws on
treaties, etc., with other governments or even on decisions made in
international conferences, etc. This makes it clear that even the treaties,
etc., entered into with other countries or decisions made at international
conferences have to be translated into laws and read with the provisions
already discussed above, before they are acted upon by the Executive.

4. The Union List Entry 6 makes "Atomic energy and mineral resources
necessary for its production" a subject matter of legislation of Parliament.
Similarly, Entry 13 which reads, "--- participation in international
conferences, associations and other bodies and implementing of decisions
made there at" and Entry 14 which reads, "entering into treaties and
agreements with foreign countries and implementing of treaties, agreements
and conventions with foreign countries" make them also subject matters of
legislation by Parliament.

5. All these provisions make it abundantly clear that the present Indo-U.S.
nuclear deal cannot be implemented by the Union Government unless it is
translated into a law enacted by Parliament. Any action, therefore, taken by
the Union Government to implement the said deal without the authority of
Parliament is unconstitutional, because it amounts to the usurpation of
power of Parliament by the Union Executive. It is also undemocratic because
the Union Executive will be acting arbitrarily, trampling both the rule of
law and also the wishes of the people of India. It will be nothing short of
an arbitrary rule by the Executive, leading to an unconstitutional
government in the country, because what is arbitrary is also
unconstitutional.

6. With regard to the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal, it may be stated that, on the
face of it, it is subject to the internal laws of both the countries, namely
India and the U.S. Article 2.1 of the 123 Agreement states in the clearest
possible terms, "Each Party shall implement this Agreement in accordance
with its respective applicable treaties, national laws, regulations and
licence requirements concerning the use of nuclear energy for peaceful
purposes."

This means that the 123 agreement is subject to all the present internal
laws of the U.S. government, right from the U.S. Atomic Energy Act 1954 to
the Hyde Act 2006, all inclusive. Not only that, but it will be subject to
amendments to these present laws and to any new law that may be enacted in
the future. This position is further made clear also by Articles 3.3
and 5.2of this agreement. Article
3.3 states, "This agreement does not require the transfer of any information
regarding matters outside the scope of this agreement, or information that
the Parties are not permitted under their respective treaties, national
laws, or regulations to transfer." Article 5.2 states, "---- Transfers of
dual-use items that could be used in enrichment, reprocessing or heavy water
production facilities will be subject to the Parties' respective applicable
laws, regulations and licence policies." What holds good for Article
2.1holds also good for these two provisions as well.

7. Furthermore, Article 5.6(a) of the agreement clearly states that "As part
of its implementation of the July 18, 2005 Joint Statement, the United
States is committed to seeking agreement from the U.S. Congress to amend its
domestic laws and to work with friends and allies to adjust the practices of
the Nuclear Suppliers Group to create the necessary conditions for India to
obtain full access to the international fuel market, including reliable,
uninterrupted and continual access to fuel supplies from firms in several
nations." In view of this statement in the 123 Agreement dated August 2007,
it is clear that before the U.S. is obliged to act under this agreement
insofar as assured and continual fuel supplies are concerned, the U.S.
Administration will have to approach the U.S. Congress to get their present
laws, including the Hyde Act 2006, amended. It is unfortunate that the
Government of India is rushing through this deal even before the U.S. has
got its laws, including the Hyde Act 2006, amended to assure life-time
uninterrupted fuel supplies, under all circumstances, for the nuclear
reactors we intend to import. As it stands, the 123 Agreement of August 2007
does not in anyway provide binding fuel supply assurances.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Ours is a battle not for wealth or for power.
It is a battle for freedom. It is a battle for the reclamation of human
personality."
- Dr BR Ambedkar
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to