14 May, 2008

Supreme Court of India refuses to interfere with French law on Sikh rights

A Sikh forum on Tuesday presented an impossible task before the Supreme Court — to extend its jurisdiction to France to protect religious rights of the community, perceived to be under threat from a local law banning exhibition of religious symbols by citizens.
A bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and Mukundakam Sharma chuckled at the suggestion but tried to reason it out with petitioner ‘Singh Legal Forum’ that it was a matter for the ministry of external affairs to take up with the French government and that the apex court had no role to play.
Petitioner’s counsel persisted with the plea for relief from the SC on the ground that there was no tangible help from the government and there had been no let up in the implementation of the rigorous French law, which was enacted in 2004 and was hurting the religious sentiments of a sizeable number of Sikhs in France. The bench, unable to make the petitioner see reason, said, “The government had taken up the matter with the French government and the SC can do little in this.”
The unrelenting petitioner angered the Bench. The bench said, “Then you go before the International Court of Justice or the European Human Rights Commission. We do not have jurisdiction over other countries.”
The petitioner NGO had first moved the Punjab and Haryana high court in 2005. The high court, after seeking replies from the Centre, had dismissed the petition saying the government had done its bit and the French government had clarified that the 2004 law applied to all religious communities equally and that there was no discriminatory application of the legislation banning exhibition of religious symbols in public.

With thanks from The Times of India 14 May 2008 P.9 Delhi
With thanks from The Time of India
©All rights reserved with the Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd

For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"When something that is too obvious is being contested, it pays to reveal the reasons for the contest."
I think adding a few lines on the thrust of the Singh NGO's argument would have been appropriate.