Ideology and the role of the judiciary are frequently in tension. In Six Great Inventions in the Art of the Government, Samuel Finer praises Judicial Review as one of the practices that established and shaped the modern state. He sees the Supreme Court’s ability to interpret a case to protect American citizens as foundation of an effective government. Nonetheless, Judicial Review is more applicable as a doctrine than as an unchanging invention. Theodore Lowi’s piece Bend Sinister: How the Constitution Saved the Republic and Lost Itself would inherently disagree with Finer.
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.
The role of judiciary is to administer justice to all citizens and it comprises of courts that take decisions on a very large number of cases. Judicial independence is the keystone of Canadian judicial system. That is the reason, the judiciary is an independent from other branches of government, the executive and legislative. The main role of judge is to interpret laws. Judicial independence assures that judges will have the capacity to make laws and settle on choices free of impact and in light of the law.
It is also very important because it allows the supreme court of the country to check the decisions of the lower courts of the country and it also helps to check on the legislative and the executive branch of the government. The most important thing that judicial review do is the protection of the rights of the individuals and it create a balance between the powers of the government and maintain equality to every person. If there is no judicial review then the system of civil liberties would be very different. Types of Decisions in Judicial Review The court can give three types of decisions after the judicial review is conducted and the decisions are as follows: 1. The law is unconstitutional.
In brief a judicial review is a procedure by which a court can review an administrative action by a public body and secure a declaration, order, or award. But despite this very simple dictionary definition a judicial review, the procedure can be a complex process. To begin, I will advise Save Our Birds on the nature of a judicial review procedure. In my address to Save Our Birds I will also highlight the differences between the judicial review procedure and an appeals process. In advising Save Our Birds on the nature of a judicial review it is necessary to emphasise the fact that a judicial review is not concerned with the decision actually taken, it’s concerned with the decision making process and whether or not the decision is found to be defective due to dishonesty, or bad faith .1 A special procedure for judicial review applies in the case of Save Our Birds as here we are reviewing a decision actually made by An Board Pleanála.2 A Judicial review is the only way in which they can challenge this decision made.
“With the coming into force of the 1992 Constitution, Ghana has made a departure from an understanding of judicial review as practiced in England and Wales.” Discuss this assertion with reference to any relevant Supreme Court decisions. Judicial review is the means by which the courts control the exercise of governmental power by ensuring that public bodies which exercise law-making power or adjudicatory powers are kept within the confines of the power conferred . Judicial review is concerned with whether the law has been correctly applied, and the right procedures have been followed. In Ghana, judicial review can been implemented upon request by a citizen of the country. It can be a fast, effective and powerful way to convince a public body
According to the rule of law, courts are better protector of individual liberty. Courts adjudicate dispute and exercise check and balance on the executive. Hence, judiciary independence is the heart of democratic system which earns the confidence of public. While there lacks a written constitution safeguarding judicial independence, the court is protected by various ways such as statute , parliamentary protection and common law. The maxim nemo Judex in causa sua state that no one shall be the judge of his own cause provides the rules against bias.
Judiciary is symbolized to be the upholder of human rights ensuring ever citizen of its constitutional rights. Right to Constitutional Remedies, a fundamental right, states that every citizen of India can move a court of law in case of denial of its rights. This representation of courts as an institution of justice, free of discrimination and influence, seems to be withering. The loss of trust is not due to incapability of judges to make right judgments but because of political interference. There exists a nexus between judiciary, executive and legislative, which leads to screwed outcomes, favoring the party.
This article analysed the importance of judicial restraint in the context of adjudicating policy questions and suggested a more righteous form of judicial activism. But the most academically rich work that I have ever written is the research paper ‘Undemocratic Nature of Judicial Process in India: Reconciling Constitutional Theories and the Reality’. This paper critically analysed the nature of judicial process involved in 27 landmark judgments of the Indian Supreme Court since 1950. When this paper was selected for presentation at the 1st Constitutional law Scholars Forum organised in Orlando,