- Judicial activism refers to the interference of the judiciary in the legislative and executive fields. It mainly occurs due to the non-activity of the other organs of the government.
- In short, judicial activism means that instead of judicial restraint, the Supreme Court and other lower courts become activists and compel the authority to act and sometimes also direct the government regarding policies and administration.
· When the legislature and
executive fails to discharge its responsibilities.
· In case where the
government is very weak and instable.
· When the governments fail
to protect the basic rights of the citizens or provide an honest, efficient and
just system of law and administration.
· When the party in power
misuses its power for ulterior motives as was done during the Emergency period.
· Finally, the court may on
its own try to expand its jurisdiction and confer on themselves more functions
and powers.
Areas of Judicial Activism
Judiciary through judicial activism has played
significant role in:
· Protection of ecology and
environment pollution.
· Protection against
inhuman treatment in jail.
· Protection against Sexual
harassment of working women.
· Ban on smoking in public
places.
· Recent Examples: common
wealth scam, 2G scam, Noida land acquisition case and 2002 Gujarat riot case.
Instruments of Judicial Activism
1. Public interest litigation (PIL) - means a suit filed in a court of law for the protection of
public interest such as pollution, terrorism, road safety etc. It is not
defined in any statute or act.
2. Judicial
review - Article 13 conferred
wide power of judicial review to the Apex court. In the exercise of the
judicial review it can examine the constitutionality of executive or legislative
act.
3. Constitutional Remedies - Article 32 makes the Supreme Court as the protector and guarantor
of the fundamental rights.
Criticism of Judicial Activism
1. The judiciary is
interfering in the field of executive and legislative. Due to which separation
of power is at stake.
2. Executive and legislative
have popular mandate as they are elected while judiciary is an appointed body.
So it should not interfere in policy matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment