Law is one subject that I have passionately fostered in my life. My father being a leading constitutional lawyer, I was introduced to law in my childhood itself. As a result of my interactions with him about his cases, I gradually developed an academic curiosity about constitutional law even before I joined a law school. For my undergraduate study of law, I was fortunate to gain admission to the reputed National Law University, Jodhpur in 2010. Motivated by the previously accumulated curiosity, I was enthusiastic to learn constitutional law ever since my first year of law school. Fortunately, the highly experienced Prof. K.V.Mohanan taught two courses on constitutional governance over the first two years itself. His specialist lectures made …show more content…
I also wrote seven research papers and presented them at prominent national and international conferences to ensure that my views are heard more widely. Moreover, valuable feedback on my work from esteemed participants at such conferences helped me understand different legal perspectives. Within constitutional law, my major research focus has been on principles of judicial adjudication and other issues relating to the Indian judiciary. Notably, my article ‘Judicial Activism in India: Is it Against the Flow of Democracy?’ was selected as the only student-authored chapter in the edited book ‘Democracy in India: Current Debates and Emerging Challenges’ (2015, forthcoming). 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, …show more content…
The primary reason for choosing UCL is that it is one of the best research universities in the world. My emphasis on research-based study over any other form is highly compatible with the research-intensive approach of UCL as evidenced by its top ranking in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework. Further, UCL offers a wide range of courses that would allow me to attain a specialisation in public law. I intend to pursue courses like Comparative Constitutional Law, Constitutional Theory, Judicial Review, EU Administrative Law and Access to Justice which reflect my research interests. I particularly look forward to the lectures from Prof. Jeff King whose award winning book ‘Judging Social Rights’ (2012) provided me fresh perspectives on the limited role of courts in social rights adjudication. Further, for my Independent Research Essay, I wish to work under the guidance of Prof. King on the nature of judicial process employed in judgments of the Indian Supreme Court regarding appointment of judges to the higher judiciary. Resources at the UCL Judicial Institute would help me considerably to approach this issue comparatively as well. Additionally, tutelage under other world-class professors like Richard Rawlings and Eric Barendt would help me learn more about the
The executive branch includes and is led by the President of the United States of America. Furthermore, this branch also includes the cabinet, executive, and independent agency departments. The President is able to veto the proposition of a new law and designate federal judges and federal posts. The President is also given the power to grant forgiveness to a crime that has been committed. As well as negotiate with foreign countries and treaties about situations and certain topics.
This paper discusses the review of the Ontario Court of Appeal between Trinity Western University v. The Law Society of Upper Canada. The structure of this paper will begin with the facts of the case which includes both the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Divisional Court decision, and the conflicting issues of the case. The second portion discusses an analytical point of the case which focuses on the limitations clause of the Charter. In this paper, I will be demonstrating that the rights and freedoms in the Charter are not absolute. - Facts of the case Trinity Western University (TWU) is a private university in British Columbia that provides an education based on evangelical Christian principles.
In the year 1803, an ambivalent, undetermined principle lingered within the governing minds. The government and its “justified” Constitution were thought to be fully explained, until a notion occurred that would bring individuals to question the authority and their limit for empowerment. To end his days as president, John Adams named fifty-eight people from his political party to be federal judges, filing positions created by the Judiciary Act of 1800, under the frequently listed Organic Act. His secretary John Marshall delivered and sealed most of the commissions, however seventeen of them had not yet been delivered before Adams’s departure in 1801. On top of that, Thomas Jefferson refused to appoint those seventeen people because they were
In his book Judicial Tyranny: The New Kings of America, Mark Sutherland has assembled a wonderful cast of Christian attorneys, jurists, political scientists, and clergy who offer a rather perceptive analysis of judicial tyranny and our hope and means of restraining an overactive judiciary. Contributors include James Dobson, former U.S. Attorney General Edward Meese, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, Don Feder, David Gibbs, Howard Phillips, Rev. Rick Scarborough, Phyllis Schlafly, and Herbert Titus among others. For too long, Congress has been complacent in the face of an overreaching, activist judiciary that has been out-of-step with the will of the great majority of the American people, and the judiciary has overstepped the bounds of
According to the act “everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person, and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” (The Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982). Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms sets rights that protect us when dealing with the justice system. The charter ensures that “that individuals who are involved in legal proceedings are treated fairly, especially those charged with a criminal offence” (Section 7-14: Legal Rights). Finally, were the equality rights.
3). He also advocates that the very nature of a constitutional government, though it does give power to only a few bodies, ultimately rests on the authority of the people. Because, in order for the different departments of government to operate correctly, they must be separate from any of the other departments; he states that the only way to achieve this is by nature of the people
The Boston Massacre is one of America’s most memorable moments in history. The Tragedy of March 5th was a leading event that soon stimulated its significance toward the American Revolution. The debate of who to blame for the occurrence of the massacre is still ongoing, and like most debates there are two different sides to the argument. Doug Linder, phenomenally explains the events that led to the massacre in his article “The Boston Massacre Trails: An Account”, in which he analyzes all facts and aspects that occurred during the trial to the point where he explores who is to blame for the horrendous event on the night of march 5th. In the article, Linder is trying to explain that through all the pain and death during that dreadful night, the
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.
Lastly, courts lack the resource to implement policies in line with their decisions. Thus, even when cases are won, “court decisions are often rendered useless” as litigants are left to the task of implementation (Rosenburg 21). Despite the Constrained Courts view that courts are insufficient in producing social change, “it does not deny the possibility” (Rosenburg 21). When the right factors are in place and certain conditions in favor of the case’s outcome, courts can be a powerful institution in promoting justice (Hall 2).
Discretion on every level of the criminal process is important. Depending upon how an officer handles a traffic stop could end an arrest or how a prosecutor will prosecute any defend it can depend on whether or not the individuals will spend a significant amount of time in jail. The amount of bail set, evidence, and even probation can all be at the discretion of the Judge and also the prosecutors. These are all discussed in Judicial Discretion In The Common Law Courts an article in the Washington and Lee Law Review. Each of these plays a vital role in determining the outcome of a case put before a judge.
Judicial Restraint v Judicial Activism: District of Columbia v Heller, 2008 The Constitution states that the “judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court,” a court made up of justices from different backgrounds, races, religions, and most importantly political views. The Court has the ultimate responsibility of overseeing all affairs of Congress and – when deemed necessary – acting to overturn decisions found not in accordance with the Constitution. When deciding cases that could potentially violate the Constitution, justices use judicial restraint or judicial activism in their decision-making. Judicial activism is a term used for instances in which judges “creatively (re)interpret the texts of the Constitution and the laws, ” allowing them to meet the needs of the people that would not be met otherwise; justices essentially act as policy makers.
5 Legislationgovuk, 'Article 6 ' (Human Rights Act 1998, 09/11/1998) accessed 27 September 2016 Scottish courts and tribunals service, 'Https://wwwscotcourtsgovuk/docs/default-source/coming-to-court/jurors/guidetojuryserviceeligibilitypdf?sfvrsn=6 ' (Guide to jury service Eligibility and Applying fot excusal, 1974) accessed 27 September 2016 Christopher H. smith, Human Rights in Northern Ireland: Congressional Hearing (DIANE Publishing, 1999) 142 Jennifer Currer and Peter Smith, AQA Law AS: Student 's Book Paperback (Nelson Thornes; New edition 2008) Kronlid [1996] AC 541 (CA) Alisdair gillespie and Siobhan weare, The English Legal System (Oxford University
Human rights were initiated for the protection of the basic civil and political liberties in the general public. In the United Kingdom the Human Rights Act of 1998 came into force in October 2000. The aim of the HRA in the UK was to provide further legal effect to the basic rights and freedoms contained in the European Convention of Human Rights. The rights contained in the HRA not only affect essential matters of life and death, but also issues that occur in people 's daily life. Considering the broad range of basic rights covered, it is not astonishing that the HRA is viewed as one of the most significant segments of legislation ever passed in the UK.
[5] Common law works in a different way, the judges rather than the Parliament make common law or ‘judge-made law’. Considering criminal and civil cases, the judges take decisions based on the stare decisis principle (Latin “to stand by things decided”, the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent [4]), deliver rulings and create precedents, thus applying the law to real life situations. Therefore, the value of the precedent is very high in the English Common Law system. The strengths of common law
The law is an intriguing concept, evolving from society’s originalities and moral perspectives. By participating in the legal system, we may endeavour to formulate a link between our own unique beliefs and the world in which we live. Evidently, a just sense of legality is a potent prerequisite for change, enabling society to continue its quest for universal equality and justice. Aristotle once stated that "even when laws have been written down, they ought not to remain unaltered".