While 50 percent of the powers of Parliament have been usurped by the courts, the Election Commission has further dented Parliament's authority by laying down its own "laws" in the name of issuing orders for the conduct of elections, Naik said in the Rajya Sabha on Friday while participating in a resolution
Naik said that the Courts often step in to assume powers of the legislature and the executive on the grounds that they did not act and wondered what will happen if the three organs provided under the Constitution start assuming each other's powers because the other does not function satisfactorily.
"What happens if the prime minister, adopts the judiciary's logic saying that because lakhs of cases are pending undecided in the courts, he has decided to give decisions on them," Naik asked.
He said the courts quashing a legislation on grounds of violation of fundamental rights or public policy can be understood, but courts on the pretext of interpretation have starting laying down the laws themselves and even set up monitoring committees that virtually replace the government departments.
Naik objected to the courts deciding the location of an industry or decide what children should eat in their mid-day meals
or striking down the MP Local Area Development Scheme.
The Goa MP said the same trend is continuing with the Election Commission. It has only a supervisory jurisdiction under Article 324 of the Constitution but it goes on writing letters and issuing orders, claiming these to be the "law."
For Parliament it takes years to enact a law while the Commission writes letters on the "spur of moment and gives them the status of a law," Naik said, citing how the Election Symbols Order of 1968 has become a substantive law while in reality it is a mere order issued by the Commission.
He said if the people of India decide at any point of time to shift to the Presidential form of the government, the Supreme Court will step in to assert that the Parliamentary form of government is the basic structure of the Constitution, which cannot be changed. The Constitution does not say anything on its basic structure, but it was the judiciary that introduced this concept.
Naik demanded that all important pronouncements of the Supreme Court that are acceptable be codified urgently and the laws be amended wherever such pronouncements were not acceptable.
Referring to the government's hurry to enact a law for setting up the National Investigating Agency, he said a similar legislation should be enacted to government the Central Bureau of Investigation which hitherto functions under a scanty legislation like Delhi Police Establishment Act.
