They are as under. 1. The independence of judiciary will be guaranteed by the state and enshrined in the constitution laws of the country. It is the duty of all governments and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary. 2.
The Legislative Aspect of the Judiciary: Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint; Justice B.S. Chauhan: This speech highlights the doctrine of Separation of Powers, limited role of the Judges as a Law Giver, and also the criticisms of the Power of Judicial Review. 3. The Philosophy of Judicial Restraint; Markandey Katju, The Express Tribune, 2012: Emphasizes on broad Separation of Powers under the Constitution and also how Judicial activism should be done in rare cases. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research methodology is primarily doctrinal, based on secondary data.
The fault in this lies in the motivation behind the justices’ decisions; with judicial activism, it is nearly impossible to view law as objective and free of bias. Many fear that in acting as policy makers, justices bring their own partialities and beliefs into account instead of allowing the literal interpretation of the Constitution guide their decisions. On the other hand, judicial restraint can also be used when deciding cases. Judicial restraint refers to justices interpreting the United States Constitution word for word, keeping from bringing their own beliefs or biases into account and most importantly refraining from assuming the role of policy maker. Under judicial restraint, justices work to uphold the laws that are already in place and to maintain the laws as they stand except in the event that they are blatantly unconstitutional.
For the first era of the Constitutional System, the right of pursuit of happiness was directly equated with Property Rights. Legislators, however, had trouble with the precise application of constitutional law. In attempting to resolve the issues of the scope of protections to different rights, the concept of Judicial Review became the process for declaring legislation unconstitutional. Judicial Review, however, was not concrete as it was influenced by the everchanging constitutional thought of the time. In the beginning of the United States, Property Rights were the most protected rights.
Robert Isenhour Federal Government 110 10/10/17 Judicial Review Judicial Review had been obsolete until 1803 when the need for it arose in the case of Marbury vs. Madison, where it was then found to become a new component to the Judicial Branch. I am here to discuss why judicial review is and shall remain a doctrine commonly used in constitutional law. Judicial Review is the power for courts to review other government branches to determine the validity of its actions whether it be constitutional or unconstitutional. These ‘acts’ can be described as legislation passed by congress, presidential orders and actions, or all state and local governmental actions. It was first generated into a doctrine after the case of Marbury vs Madison.
the Judiciary) only to the extant that their actions are in conformity with and not in violation of the constitution. 4.2. PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION The precept of judicial evaluate is an vital
They are given judicial discretion but they expected to remain impartial, independent and free from bias. Justice must not be seen as a popularity contest and judicial independence helps in the protection from public outrage due to abuse on issues of public policy .Where there is impartiality there is objectivity. One must consider what is moral and just in the eyes of the
In order to establish justice, laws need to be interpreted and judged. When the contents of a law are used to “honor” the criminal's actions the judicial branch will bring justice to the victim and the law. The judicial branch does not prejudice, therefore they judge fairly and justly. The way the judicial branch works makes it so that it establishes justice. In Article Three of the Constitution, it states “No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” This means that the judicial branch is the only branch that can judge whether or not an act is considered treason.
The term judicial review is nothing but the procedure of examining the three wings actions such as legislative, executive and administrative law. Additional judicial review also analyze whether such actions are consistent with the constitution of the country.The doctrine of judicial review has acquired different nuances during the course of its evolution in UK, USA, and India. Its origins can be traced to UK which has no written Constitution. It has become firmly established in USA with a written Constitution establishing a federal polity. In administrative law, administrative action judicial review process has been started first from Britain.Further based on this foundation, Indian Courts built control mechanism superstructure.
The Courts are an organ of Government but they are not part of the Executive Government of that country but the apolitical organ of government the Courts are there continually to extend the protection of the law equally to all who are subject to their jurisdiction: to the minority as well as the majority, the disadvantaged as well as the powerful, to the sinners as well as the saints, to the politically incorrect as well as those who embrace a contemporary orthodoxy. The principle of judicial independence is not proclaimed in order to benefit the Judges; it is proclaimed in order to guarantee a fair and impartial hearing and an unswerving obedience to the rule of law. That is the way in which our peoples secure their freedom under the