Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Indian judiciary, enshrined as the guardian of the Constitution, has historically functioned as an interpreter and protector of fundamental rights, primarily limiting governmental overreach. However, in recent decades, a discernible shift has occurred. The judiciary is no longer solely focused on reactive adjudication – striking down laws or correcting executive actions – but is actively engaging in ‘judicial policy-making’. This involves issuing directions to the executive and legislature to formulate policies on issues ranging from environmental protection to public health, demonstrating a more positive and proactive role in governance. This evolution is particularly evident through the expansive use of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and the exercise of its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.
The Traditional Role of the Judiciary
Traditionally, the judiciary’s role was confined to interpreting laws, resolving disputes, and ensuring adherence to the Constitution. The doctrine of separation of powers dictated a clear demarcation between the three branches of government. Landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) established the ‘basic structure’ doctrine, reinforcing the judiciary’s power of judicial review, but primarily as a limiting factor on legislative power.
The Shift Towards Proactive Policy Formulation
Several factors have contributed to this shift:
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Introduced in the 1980s, PIL enabled access to justice for marginalized sections and prompted the judiciary to address systemic issues.
- Expanding Scope of Fundamental Rights: The judiciary has broadened the interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) to include rights to a clean environment, education, and health.
- Use of Article 142: This article grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any decree or make any order necessary to do complete justice, even if it goes beyond the existing legal framework.
Examples of Judicial Policy Formulation
- Environmental Protection: The Supreme Court’s interventions in the M.C. Mehta v. Union of India cases (various years) regarding pollution control in Delhi, the Taj Mahal, and the Ganga River demonstrate proactive policy direction. The court mandated specific actions like vehicle emission standards, industrial relocation, and river cleaning plans.
- Food Security: In Swaraj India v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court directed the government to formulate a national food security policy to address farmer distress and prevent food wastage.
- Healthcare: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of issues related to oxygen supply, vaccine distribution, and hospital infrastructure, issuing directions to the government to address these critical concerns.
- Road Safety: The Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety, formed in 2002, continues to monitor and recommend policy changes to improve road safety standards across the country.
- Criminal Justice System: The Court has issued directions regarding speedy trials, prison reforms, and the implementation of victim compensation schemes.
Implications and Concerns
While judicial intervention can be beneficial in addressing governance failures and protecting citizens’ rights, it also raises concerns:
- Separation of Powers: Critics argue that excessive judicial intervention encroaches upon the legislative and executive domains, blurring the lines of separation of powers.
- Lack of Expertise: The judiciary may lack the technical expertise to formulate complex policies effectively.
- Implementation Challenges: Judicial orders can be difficult to implement due to logistical and resource constraints.
- Judicial Overreach: Concerns about the judiciary exceeding its constitutional mandate and venturing into areas best left to elected representatives.
| Area of Intervention | Judicial Action | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Environment | Mandated emission standards, industrial relocation | Improved air and water quality in specific areas |
| Food Security | Directed formulation of a national food security policy | Increased focus on farmer welfare and food wastage reduction |
| Healthcare | Issued directions on oxygen supply and vaccine distribution | Improved access to essential medical resources during the pandemic |
Conclusion
The judiciary’s evolving role in policy formulation reflects a dynamic interplay between constitutional principles and societal needs. While the traditional role of safeguarding fundamental rights remains paramount, the judiciary is increasingly assuming a proactive stance in addressing governance deficits. However, maintaining a delicate balance between judicial activism and respecting the separation of powers is crucial. A collaborative approach, where the judiciary provides guidance and the executive implements policies with expertise and resources, is essential for effective governance and upholding the rule of law.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.