Judicial activism has been a topic of debate in India for many years. It refers to the phenomenon where judges take an active role in shaping public policy, rather than limiting themselves to interpreting the law. This has become a hot topic once again in the current scenario as many people question the role of judges in shaping public policy.
The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the land, and it provides for an independent judiciary that is free from the influence of the executive and legislative branches of the government. The judiciary is responsible for interpreting the law and ensuring that the rights of citizens are protected.
It has the power to strike down any law that is unconstitutional or violates the rights of citizens. This power of the judiciary serves as a check on the legislative and executive branches of the government, and it ensures that the government does not exceed its powers.
However, there have been instances where judges have taken an active role in shaping public policy. This has led to a debate on whether judges should limit themselves to interpreting the law or whether they should actively shape public policy.
It is necessary for judges to take an active role in shaping public policy in order to protect the rights of citizens. Sometimes the executive and legislative branches of the government fail to protect the rights of citizens, and it is up to the judiciary to step in and ensure that justice is served.
Judges should limit themselves to interpreting the law. Judges should not take an active role in shaping public policy, as this is the job of the executive and legislative branches of the government. The judicial activism can lead to a situation where judges become too powerful and undermine the democratic process.
It is important to remember that the independence of the judiciary is an essential feature of Indian democracy. The judiciary serves as a check on the other two branches of the government, and it ensures that the government does not exceed its powers. The Constitution of India provides for an independent judiciary, and this independence should be respected.
At the same time, it is important to strike a balance between judicial activism and judicial restraint. Judges should not become too powerful and should limit themselves to interpreting the law. However, there may be situations where judicial activism is necessary to protect the rights of citizens. In such situations, judges should take an active role in shaping public policy.
The fabric of the Indian Constitution entails the independence of the judiciary, executive, and legislative. It is in the interest of the nation as a whole that the independence of these three major pillars of Indian democracy should be kept intact.
Judges should not become too powerful, but they should also be willing to take an active role in shaping public policy when necessary to protect the rights of citizens. Ultimately, the balance between judicial activism and judicial restraint must be struck in order to ensure that justice is served and the democratic process is respected.
