While I do not consider the Indian Supreme Court an authority on political theory and philosophy, and would certainly not accord it status as a ‘supreme’ guide for Sri Lanka’s citizenry, I rather doubt that the full bench of the Indian Supreme Court concluded that “political sovereignty lied with the people”
by Dr Dayan Jayatilleka
(September 19, Singapore City, Sri Lanka Guardian) I must congratulate JNU ‘research scholar’ Avinash Pandey Samar on producing a rarity: a veritable collector’s item of ignorance and incoherence.
He quotes once again a passage of his prose which he is particularly proud of and rightly so, but not for the reasons he would imagine. I too found it fascinating and wish to share it with the reader:
“...The full bench of the Indian Supreme Court ...asserted that ...political sovereignty lied with the people....”
In case one cannot believe one’s eyes, he reiterates this two paragraphs later: “...political sovereignty lied with the people, not with the office of the institution representing it.”
Incredible as it may seem, the good ‘research scholar’ Mr Pandey Samar follows up this profundity with two pointed questions:
“So what about English now? Do you get your answer now?”
What indeed about English now, Mr Pandey, what indeed!
While I do not consider the Indian Supreme Court an authority on political theory and philosophy, and would certainly not accord it status as a ‘supreme’ guide for Sri Lanka’s citizenry, I rather doubt that the full bench of the Indian Supreme Court concluded that “political sovereignty lied with the people”. Unless he produces a direct quote with source, I would have to conclude that it is Avinash Pandey Samar who has lied in this regard.
To answer his second question, no I haven’t got my answer now. I have in fact one more questions than I had before, namely “who lied to whom, where, why and when?”
Please refer to previous article: ‘Research this’ does not mean Google this Dr Dayan, or maybe that is your idea of research!
Post a Comment