Judicial Control Over Legislature and Executive

Judicial control over the legislature and executive is a fundamental aspect of governance in India. It ensures that the actions of these branches of government adhere to the Constitution. This control is executed through various constitutional provisions, judicial review, and landmark cases. The judiciary plays important role in maintaining the balance of power and protecting citizens’ rights.

Constitutional Provisions

The Constitution of India contains several articles that empower the judiciary to oversee the legislature and executive.

Article 13

Article 13 invalidates any law that contravenes fundamental rights. This provision ensures that all legislative actions must align with the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. For example, any law that discriminates based on religion or gender can be struck down by the courts.

Article 32

Article 32 grants individuals the right to approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights.

Judicial Review

Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to assess the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.

Definition

Judicial review allows courts to invalidate laws, ordinances, and executive orders that violate the Constitution. This mechanism is vital for upholding the rule of law.

Scope

The scope of judicial review encompasses all forms of legislation and executive actions. It ensures that no law or order can stand if it is unconstitutional.

Landmark Cases

Several landmark cases have shaped the doctrine of judicial review in India:

1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Established the Basic Structure Doctrine, stating that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be amended.
2. Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) – Reinforced the Basic Structure Doctrine and emphasised the importance of judicial review in protecting constitutional supremacy.

Basic Structure Doctrine

The Basic Structure Doctrine is a very important legal principle in Indian constitutional law.

Origin

This doctrine emerged from the Kesavananda Bharati case. It asserts that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its fundamental framework.

Significance

The doctrine protects essential features of the Constitution, such as the supremacy of the Constitution, rule of law, separation of powers, and fundamental rights.

Components

Key components of the Basic Structure include:

• Supremacy of the Constitution
• Rule of law
• Separation of powers
• Fundamental rights

Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint

Judicial activism and judicial restraint represent two contrasting approaches within the judiciary.

Judicial Activism

Judicial activism refers to a proactive role taken by courts in protecting rights and ensuring justice. An example is Public Interest Litigations (PILs), which allow individuals to seek judicial intervention on behalf of the public.

Judicial Restraint

Judicial restraint is when courts limit their own power and defer to the legislature and executive. Courts adopt this approach unless there is a clear constitutional violation.

Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Public Interest Litigation is a legal mechanism aimed at protecting the public interest.

Definition

PILs are legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public, especially for disadvantaged groups.

Impact

PILs expand access to justice and enable the judiciary to intervene in legislative and executive matters. This has been crucial for social justice.

Notable Cases

Significant PIL cases include:

1. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) – Established guidelines to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace.

Separation of Powers

The principle of separation of powers is fundamental to the Constitution of India.

Principle

This principle delineates distinct functions and powers among the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Each branch operates independently.

Judicial Oversight

Judicial oversight ensures that the other branches do not exceed their authority. This oversight is essential for maintaining constitutional integrity.

Checks and Balances

Checks and balances are mechanisms that allow each branch of government to limit the powers of the others.

Mechanism

Each branch can check the others to prevent abuse of power. For instance, courts can invalidate unconstitutional laws.

Judicial Checks

Judicial checks are vital for maintaining accountability. Courts can review and nullify laws or executive actions that violate constitutional provisions.

Judicial Accountability

Judicial accountability ensures that judges remain answerable for their actions.

Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill

This proposed bill aimed to establish measures for holding judges accountable. It sought to enhance transparency in judicial functioning.

Judicial Appointments

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was established to improve transparency in judicial appointments. However, it was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015, reaffirming the independence of the judiciary.

Role of the Supreme Court and High Courts

The Supreme Court and High Courts play crucial roles in judicial control.

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the apex court with the highest authority in judicial review. It serves as the final arbiter of constitutional disputes.

High Courts

High Courts have jurisdiction over state laws. They can review state legislative and executive actions, ensuring compliance with the Constitution.

Limitations of Judicial Control

Judicial control is not absolute and has certain limitations.

Doctrine of Political Question

The doctrine of political question limits judicial intervention in matters deemed political or non-justiciable. Courts may refrain from ruling on such issues.

Legislative Supremacy

While the judiciary can review laws, the legislature retains the power to amend the Constitution, subject to the Basic Structure Doctrine.

Recent Trends

Recent trends indicate a shift in the judiciary’s role in governance.

Increased Judicial Intervention

Courts have become more proactive in governance matters, addressing issues like environmental protection and human rights.

Criticism of Judicial Overreach

There are growing concerns regarding judicial overreach. Critics argue that the judiciary is encroaching upon the domains of the legislature and executive.

Judicial Independence

Judicial independence is crucial for upholding the rule of law.

Importance

Independence ensures impartiality in judicial review. It allows judges to make decisions free from external pressures.

Threats

Judicial independence faces threats from political pressure, executive interference, and issues related to judicial appointments. These challenges can undermine the judiciary’s role in governance. Thus, judicial control over the legislature and executive is essential for upholding constitutional values in India. The judiciary serves as a guardian of fundamental rights and a check on governmental powers. Through various constitutional provisions, landmark cases, and the Basic Structure Doctrine, the judiciary maintains a balance of power. About these dynamics is crucial for appreciating the role of the judiciary in Indian governance.