Madhav Agarawal257 wordsTheir whole copy
Opening · a definition
Judicial activism is the assertive & proactive role played by the courts to fill the vacuum created by other organs. The main source of this power is from PIL (Justice Bhagwati).
Persistent Legislative Dysfunction:
Body · points and prose
-> House disruption and political walkouts. -> Poor quality debate: As per PRS, Half Bills of 17th LS passed in two hours. -> Reduced Attendance & duration: | 1950 | Current | | ~120 days | ~70 days. |
Hence judicial intervention became key.
(1) Securing gender parity in laws: (g): X v/s Govt brought medical termination of pregnancy open to all girls (unmarried too).
(2) Check working of investigation bodies: (g): CBI functioning overseen in Lodha Case.
(3) Bringing structural reforms: (g): Prakash Singh case: 2yrs tenure for DGP; State Security Commission, etc.
(4) Keeping governance neutral: (g): Civil Service Board as per TSR Subramanian case.
(5) Rights for common man: (g): Right to food as per PUCL case to tackle hunger & malnutrition.
But this often creates tensions too:
(1) Judiciary does not enjoy people mandate unlike Executive.
(2) Judiciary not competent to deliberate and deliver pronouncements (g): took backseat in same sex marriage case
(3) Can lead to judicial overreach: (g): Delhi crackers case, National Anthem Case (Shyam Narayan Chouksey)
(4) Breaches Separation of Power (Article 50)
Close · a way forward
Need for the hour is to have quality debates in parliament via R&D support to MPs (via US Congressional Service model).
At same time Judicial activism can be a medicine not a daily bread thus need to respect 'Marayada' of SoP.
How toppers approach this question, and more on its topic: open the question.