▮▮▮, please read his entire remarks in entirety in both the articles: Palkhivala DEFENDED Article 370 and the right of Kashmir to SECEDE from India if the article was abolished. He did not want election abolished, but a system where educated professionals appoint other educated professionals to the Lok Sabha. Plus a presidential form of government. And his model strongman was Kamal Ataturk, a SECULAR person who de-Islamised Turkey and encouraged Westernisation. Doesn't sound like the view of Modi bhakt to me. Also, the comments were made before Modi became PM. And he was, of course, a Parsi.
What Palkhivala was essentially saying is that India is unfit to be a democracy because we send corrupt and uneducated people to Parliament. Is he really wrong? Both NDA and INDIA voters for corrupt criminals and murderers, just because of caste and religious loyalties.
"We are not made for democracy. We are made to be ruled by a strong man. Like Kemal Ataturk. I have said repeatedly that India needs a strong man, not adult franchise. I haven't seen anyone yet. I hope it does happen in my lifetime."
"I am totally disillusioned. I don't believe in adult franchise at all. We have no reverance for our Constitution. We have no distinction between ordinary and Constitutional law. We are third rate, unfit to be a democracy."
"You cannot remove 370, because that was a condition Kashmir became a part of India. If Article 370 is removed, I don't see why Kashmir should continue to be a part of India."
"The third suggestion would be to alter Article 75 to provide that every one of the 26 states of India should be entitled to send two representatives to the Lok Sabha who would not be elected on the basis of adult franchise, but would be elected by universities and professional bodies. A similar provision should be made to have one representative so elected from each major Union Territory. This way we would have about 52 MPs who would represent the professions and the faculties and would be able to improve the tone and standard of debate in Parliament. "
*"*There are four advantages in having the presidential system patterned on the liberal, democratic model:
First, it enables the President to have a cabinet of outstanding competence and integrity, since the choice is not restricted to Parliament. A wise President can substitute excellence for the deadwood which passes for government today.
Secondly, since Cabinet ministers are not elected, they are not motivated to adopt cheap populist measures which are so costly to the country in the long run. For instance, they would not resort to nationalisation which is the last refuge of inefficient administrators.
Thirdly, the presidential system permits Cabinet ministers to be absorbed in the job of governing the country, instead of wasting their time and potential in endless politicking.
Fourthly, it would stop defections and desertions on the part of legislators, which are in most cases motivated purely by thirst of power and hunger for office."
Palkhivala cannot be called a jurist by any stretch of the imagination. He was just a practising corporate lawyer serving the interests of rich corporations and the Savarna class, no different than Cyril Shroff or Harish Salve. True jurists are people who give intellectual critiques of the law and promote goals of social and economic justice, rather than the interests of the Savarna class. People like Upendra Baxi, VR Krishna Iyer, Madan Lokur, Tarunabh Khaitan, Indira Jaising, Anand Grover, Prashant Bhushan, BS Chimni, Rebecca John, Vrinda Grover, Gautam Bhatia, Menaka Guruswamy, Karuna Nundy etc. And of course the greatest jurist India has ever produced is Dr BR Ambedkar.
Palkhivala’s writings are also very average and full of elitist boomer Savarna rants: no to reservation, no to corruption, yes to free markets etc. That’s not how things should work. It is better to have a government headed by Lalu Yadav or MK Stalin with corruption verses a Savarna government headed by the BJP with no corruption, because promoting social justice and secularism is the need of the hour. Also, if you only allow educated people to vote for other educated people, the Lok Sabha will only have the Savarna class and not have enough Muslim, Dalit and tribal MPs. You might as well hand over the government to the Tatas and Ambanis in that case.
IMO law students should stay away from Palkhivaka’s writings and law school libraries should not even keep them. It’s time we discard these irrelevant boomer writers and look towards exciting new writers, like Gautam Bhatia or Suraj Yengde (even though he’s not a lawyer).
Are seriously pushing a freedom and liberal oriented stance and simultaneously calling to discard their perspective/books from library because your core belief does not align in it's entirety? Seriously, is nuance dead? You don't have to agree with everything but atleast don't be a dick.
You clearly have no idea about what an intellectual is. Nani Palkhivala was nothing but a small time lawyer who appeared in cases like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. This guy on the other hand has ▮▮▮. Now you tell me, who is the intellectual
Nani's biography is titled "A Courtroom Genius". He is known for his acumen as a litigator (to some extent more generally as an orator, think of his famous budget analysis speeches) and not as a public intellectual. So Judge him by the appropriate standard.
Nani Palkiwala merely holds an LLB from GLC, no LLM or PhD. Hasn't published in any top law journal. No books published by any reputed publishing house. Wrote some book on tax or corporate law which nobody reads and which merely reproduces cases. How is he a jurist then??? Literally no one would have heard of this guy if the GLC moot wasn't named after him.
Correct. Nana would have been taken more seriously if he wrote about the need for gender fluid considerations in a blog post in the super prestigious NLSIU Journal of Humanities.
If the moot is the only place you've heard his name then it is on you not us. I am a corporate lawyer and still have heard and read about nanis contributions since first year itself. Keep your humanities journals to yourself and read up about his contribution to the country in Minevra mills. It is shocking to see 20 year old woke nlu kids disrespecting such an important figure.
What Palkhivala was essentially saying is that India is unfit to be a democracy because we send corrupt and uneducated people to Parliament. Is he really wrong? Both NDA and INDIA voters for corrupt criminals and murderers, just because of caste and religious loyalties.
"We are not made for democracy. We are made to be ruled by a strong man. Like Kemal Ataturk. I have said repeatedly that India needs a strong man, not adult franchise. I haven't seen anyone yet. I hope it does happen in my lifetime."
"I am totally disillusioned. I don't believe in adult franchise at all. We have no reverance for our Constitution. We have no distinction between ordinary and Constitutional law. We are third rate, unfit to be a democracy."
"You cannot remove 370, because that was a condition Kashmir became a part of India. If Article 370 is removed, I don't see why Kashmir should continue to be a part of India."
"The third suggestion would be to alter Article 75 to provide that every one of the 26 states of India should be entitled to send two representatives to the Lok Sabha who would not be elected on the basis of adult franchise, but would be elected by universities and professional bodies. A similar provision should be made to have one representative so elected from each major Union Territory. This way we would have about 52 MPs who would represent the professions and the faculties and would be able to improve the tone and standard of debate in Parliament. "
*"*There are four advantages in having the presidential system patterned on the liberal, democratic model:
First, it enables the President to have a cabinet of outstanding competence and integrity, since the choice is not restricted to Parliament. A wise President can substitute excellence for the deadwood which passes for government today.
Secondly, since Cabinet ministers are not elected, they are not motivated to adopt cheap populist measures which are so costly to the country in the long run. For instance, they would not resort to nationalisation which is the last refuge of inefficient administrators.
Thirdly, the presidential system permits Cabinet ministers to be absorbed in the job of governing the country, instead of wasting their time and potential in endless politicking.
Fourthly, it would stop defections and desertions on the part of legislators, which are in most cases motivated purely by thirst of power and hunger for office."
https://m.rediff.com/news/1998/jul/14nani.htm
[Mod note: Edited to make less trollish]
He is mass leader who is popularity unparalleled and he has clarity intellectual and civilizational like Savarkar.
He is our Indian Ataturk.
Palkhivala’s writings are also very average and full of elitist boomer Savarna rants: no to reservation, no to corruption, yes to free markets etc. That’s not how things should work. It is better to have a government headed by Lalu Yadav or MK Stalin with corruption verses a Savarna government headed by the BJP with no corruption, because promoting social justice and secularism is the need of the hour. Also, if you only allow educated people to vote for other educated people, the Lok Sabha will only have the Savarna class and not have enough Muslim, Dalit and tribal MPs. You might as well hand over the government to the Tatas and Ambanis in that case.
IMO law students should stay away from Palkhivaka’s writings and law school libraries should not even keep them. It’s time we discard these irrelevant boomer writers and look towards exciting new writers, like Gautam Bhatia or Suraj Yengde (even though he’s not a lawyer).
Lmao
That guy is no intellectual
Recent political posts have also shown that. Maybe I should stop correcting them because fools will remain fools no matter you educate them
Come out of it
your ideology does not match's that's why you hate others
India proved its ability to conduct UAF elections in 1952, and quite successfully at that.
.
.
.
Q ki kal subha panvel nikalna hai