The Clash of Governance and Legislative Sovereignty: Supreme Court Debates Governor's Role

The Supreme Court debated whether governors can delay assent to bills, with the West Bengal government arguing that doing so undermines legislative sovereignty. Senior counsel Kapil Sibal emphasized that executing immediate decisions is crucial, while the court examines whether timelines can be imposed on governors and the President regarding bill approvals.

In a pivotal Supreme Court hearing, the West Bengal government challenged the power of governors to delay assent to legislative bills, arguing that it undermines the sovereignty of state legislatures. Kapil Sibal, representing the state, emphasized that the executive must execute decisions promptly.

During the proceedings, the bench, led by Chief Justice B R Gavai, considered if governors had the discretion to indefinitely withhold their assent to bills, a power that could potentially render the legislative process ineffective. Sibal insisted that such actions strike at the heart of democratic governance.

The hearings continue as the court seeks to determine the constitutionality of timelines for executive action on bills, with high stakes for the balance of power between state governments and appointed governors.

(With inputs from agencies.)