India: The Land of 'Lawlessness'
I am writing this blog this morning to let my fellow readers know that the country in which they are living - India - is a land of total lawlessness. I know that many of you already know this fact; only a person who is out of his mind would deny it because when people are being ruled by some rulers, whether that be
Kings or some democratic State, chaos and lawlessness is the only
logical outcome. But many of you who still could not see this fact, because your reason has betrayed you, will demand an evidence of this fact. Below I am presenting an evidence of one such recent event which will illustrate the fact that India indeed is a land of total lawlessness; It is a country which is ruled by barbarians, people who are having no respect for the rule of law and justice.
Recently I am reading the book of John Maxcy Zane: The Story of Law. Last night while reading the chapter on ancient Greek Law, I came across couple of paragraphs, where Zane discusses what justice is not, which reminded me of the recent event of Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee proposing to retrospectively change the tax laws so that he can tax (mulct) Vodafone company's past foreign deal with Hutchison Whampoa Ltd (for details see here, here, and here). This move has created a big stir and many foreign businesses have expressed their worries of doing business in India. When you will compare what Zane has to say about justice with this Vodafone v/s Pranab Mukherjee and the Indian government tax raw, it will become clear why I am branding India as a lawless country. Here's what Zane said in those paragraphs, and I quote:
In an age incapable of thoroughly sound legal analysis—and this is true of the Greeks because the race had not yet the experience necessary to find a basis for such reasoning—men had not analyzed far enough to deduce that the legislative function consists in announcing a rule of law to govern future happenings, that the judicial function, on the other hand, consists in applying to a happening that becomes the subject of litigation a rule of law existing when the happening took place. If a new rule is announced by legislative power to govern a completed transaction, the power exerted is not a legislative power, but an arbitrary edict abrogating the applicable rule of law as to a past transaction and withdrawing from the party whose conduct is in question the equal application of the laws. For his particular case the party has been made an outlaw. As we have seen, the idea and concept of justice demand as the very essence of justice, preëxisting rules of law applicable to all alike and impartially applied. If this is not the situation, justice does not exist, nor do laws exist.
“Law is something more than mere will exerted as an act of power.” Such is the weighty language of the Supreme Court of the United States. Hence, when the legal system is so instituted that the legislative body can decide a lawsuit by an edict for a particular case, it is neither legislating nor adjudicating, but is simply exerting arbitrary and uncontrolled power, than which nothing is more contrary to the fundamental basis of justice...
And the more relevant para:
If a man cannot to-day see that it is in reason impossible to govern a completed transaction by a rule of law invented after the transaction happened, he is not a reasonable human being. Even in trivial matters like a game of cards, the none too intellectual devotees of that pursuit recognize at once the nonsense of inventing a rule to govern a play after the play has been made. To card players it is an axiom that the rule existing when the play was made must govern the play, and that has been the actual demand of justice as to important matters in all the ages since the idea of justice was first comprehended by men.
We can see above that whatever Zane said in those couple of paragraphs perfectly fits the case of Vodafone v/s India government tax raw. Indian government, especially the inept finance minister, is trying to invent a rule to govern a play after the play has been made! This is sheer nonsense coming from the mouth of the finance minister. Although there is no relation between the State and the law - because the State is an unlawful entity to being with - but still, when the government starts to change the rules retrospectively, it is a sign that the country has degenerated into total lawlessness.
Indian government is financially broke and in its attempt to survive it is now resorting to such mad means of retrospectively changing the legislative rules. The economic impact of such measures will be devastating for the economy as more and more foreign firms become reluctant to come to India. Ultimately the common man will suffer, as usual.
Recently I am reading the book of John Maxcy Zane: The Story of Law. Last night while reading the chapter on ancient Greek Law, I came across couple of paragraphs, where Zane discusses what justice is not, which reminded me of the recent event of Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee proposing to retrospectively change the tax laws so that he can tax (mulct) Vodafone company's past foreign deal with Hutchison Whampoa Ltd (for details see here, here, and here). This move has created a big stir and many foreign businesses have expressed their worries of doing business in India. When you will compare what Zane has to say about justice with this Vodafone v/s Pranab Mukherjee and the Indian government tax raw, it will become clear why I am branding India as a lawless country. Here's what Zane said in those paragraphs, and I quote:
In an age incapable of thoroughly sound legal analysis—and this is true of the Greeks because the race had not yet the experience necessary to find a basis for such reasoning—men had not analyzed far enough to deduce that the legislative function consists in announcing a rule of law to govern future happenings, that the judicial function, on the other hand, consists in applying to a happening that becomes the subject of litigation a rule of law existing when the happening took place. If a new rule is announced by legislative power to govern a completed transaction, the power exerted is not a legislative power, but an arbitrary edict abrogating the applicable rule of law as to a past transaction and withdrawing from the party whose conduct is in question the equal application of the laws. For his particular case the party has been made an outlaw. As we have seen, the idea and concept of justice demand as the very essence of justice, preëxisting rules of law applicable to all alike and impartially applied. If this is not the situation, justice does not exist, nor do laws exist.
“Law is something more than mere will exerted as an act of power.” Such is the weighty language of the Supreme Court of the United States. Hence, when the legal system is so instituted that the legislative body can decide a lawsuit by an edict for a particular case, it is neither legislating nor adjudicating, but is simply exerting arbitrary and uncontrolled power, than which nothing is more contrary to the fundamental basis of justice...
And the more relevant para:
If a man cannot to-day see that it is in reason impossible to govern a completed transaction by a rule of law invented after the transaction happened, he is not a reasonable human being. Even in trivial matters like a game of cards, the none too intellectual devotees of that pursuit recognize at once the nonsense of inventing a rule to govern a play after the play has been made. To card players it is an axiom that the rule existing when the play was made must govern the play, and that has been the actual demand of justice as to important matters in all the ages since the idea of justice was first comprehended by men.
We can see above that whatever Zane said in those couple of paragraphs perfectly fits the case of Vodafone v/s India government tax raw. Indian government, especially the inept finance minister, is trying to invent a rule to govern a play after the play has been made! This is sheer nonsense coming from the mouth of the finance minister. Although there is no relation between the State and the law - because the State is an unlawful entity to being with - but still, when the government starts to change the rules retrospectively, it is a sign that the country has degenerated into total lawlessness.
Indian government is financially broke and in its attempt to survive it is now resorting to such mad means of retrospectively changing the legislative rules. The economic impact of such measures will be devastating for the economy as more and more foreign firms become reluctant to come to India. Ultimately the common man will suffer, as usual.
Nice share , thank you..
ReplyDelete