In a thought-provoking statement, Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai emphasized that while judicial activism plays an essential role in safeguarding citizens' rights and upholding constitutional values, it must not cross the line into what he described as "judicial terrorism." This remark came during a recent interaction where CJI Gavai discussed the role of the judiciary in interpreting laws and ensuring justice. His comments highlighted the delicate balance that judges must maintain while exercising their powers, reminding them that activism in the judiciary should always be aimed at serving justice without overstepping the bounds of constitutional propriety.
Judicial activism, as a concept, refers to instances where the judiciary takes an active role in interpreting the law and the Constitution, sometimes in a manner that creates new legal precedents. While judicial activism has historically played a critical role in addressing social injustices and ensuring the protection of fundamental rights, CJI Gavai’s statement pointed to the potential dangers when this activism becomes excessive or overzealous. He cautioned that such activism, if unchecked, could undermine the balance of power between the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive.
The Chief Justice’s reference to “judicial terrorism” is an important aspect of his statement. He warned against the judiciary becoming so powerful that its actions stifle the democratic processes, infringe on the legislative and executive domains, and result in the courts making decisions that are better left to elected representatives. This warning was particularly pertinent as the judiciary in India has sometimes been criticized for encroaching upon the functions of other branches of government. The idea behind judicial terrorism, according to CJI Gavai, is when courts take decisions that not only exceed their authority but also create an atmosphere of fear or coercion, where government bodies or individuals feel pressured to act in a particular manner to avoid adverse rulings. Such overreach could undermine the delicate separation of powers that is foundational to India’s democracy.
CJI Gavai’s remarks are grounded in the belief that while the judiciary must remain an active guardian of constitutional values, it must also act with restraint and humility. Judicial power must be exercised judiciously, ensuring that its actions do not lead to instability or create an environment of unpredictability. In this context, the Chief Justice highlighted that judicial decisions should be based on sound legal reasoning and precedents, and not on personal or ideological preferences.
His comments also resonated with the larger debate around the role of the judiciary in shaping public policy. While the judiciary is entrusted with interpreting laws and safeguarding rights, its role is not to legislate or create policy frameworks, which are responsibilities of the elected government. Judicial activism that veers into policymaking could lead to an erosion of public trust in the legal system and in the democratic process itself, where citizens elect lawmakers to make decisions on their behalf.
Furthermore, CJI Gavai emphasized the importance of maintaining public confidence in the judicial system. He stressed that judges must operate in a manner that fosters respect for the judiciary as an institution that is impartial, balanced, and upholds the rule of law. This respect, he argued, is earned by demonstrating restraint and avoiding decisions that could be perceived as politically motivated or as an attempt to overrule the legislature.
In conclusion, the Chief Justice’s statement reflects a thoughtful understanding of the delicate balance the judiciary must strike. Judicial activism, when used responsibly, is vital for the health of the democracy, but when taken to extremes, it can undermine the very foundations of governance. By cautioning against “judicial terrorism,” CJI Gavai has underscored the importance of judicial restraint, maintaining the integrity of democratic institutions, and ensuring that activism never turns into an overreach.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.