Judicial Activism and the Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India has emerged as the most powerful organ of State and amongst the foremost constitutional courts in the world through the instrument of Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the exercise of writ jurisdiction and the expansive interpretation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Judicial activism impinging on every facet of governance has become the norm in recent times. This paper traces the evolution of judicial activism since Independence through pronouncements of the Supreme Court. It brings out distinct phases in this evolution – the initial phase of judicial restraint, the first phase of an activist judiciary where the Supreme Court primarily was concerned with protection of fundamental rights and humane treatment of citizens; the second phase where the Supreme Court took keen interest in preservation and protection of the environment; the third phase where the Supreme Court extended its reach into the socio-economic arena and the fourth phase when issues of transparency and probity in governance led to interventions by the Supreme Court. The paper illustrates through judgements of the Supreme Court that the instrument of the PIL and the exercise of writ jurisdiction by the Supreme Court go beyond the traditional postulates of judicial processes and political theory on separation of powers between the organs of State.
The Origin and Current Meanings of Judicial Activism
Introduction ............................................................................................ 1442 I. Early History of the Term "Judicial Activism" .............................. 1444 A. In Search of the Earliest Use ..................................................... 1444 B. First Recorded Use: Arthur Schlesinger in Fortune M agazine ..................................................................... 1445 C. Early Usage of "Judicial Activism" ......................................... 1450 D. Early Scholarly Examination of Judicial Activism ................... 1452 E. First Judicial Use of "Judicial Activism": Judge Joseph C. Hutcheson, Jr .................................................. 1455 F. Other Noteworthy Discussions of "Judicial Activism" in Judicial O pinions ...................................................................... 1459 II. Definitions of Judicial Activism ...................................................... 1463 A. Striking Down Arguably Constitutional Actions of O ther B ranches ......................................................................... 1463 B . Ignoring Precedent .................................................................... 1466 1. Vertical versus Horizontal Precedent .................................... 1466 2. Constitutional versus Statutory versus Common Law Precedents .................................................................. 1469 C . Judicial Legislation ................................................................... 1471 D. Departures from Accepted Interpretive Methodology .............. 1473 E. Result-O riented Judging ........................................................... 1475 C onclusion ............................................................................................. 14 76
Mentally disordered offenders and the law: Research update on the insanity defense, 2004-2019.
The insanity defense is among the most controversial legal constructs that has attracted the attention of scholars, practitioners and policy makers. Here, we conducted a systematic review of the literature spanning 2004 to 2019 that produced 58 studies of insanity defense research. Findings are organized according to: (1) assessments and assessment-related issues, (2) juror decision-making in defense trials, (3) characteristics of insanity acquittees, (4) release recommendations for insanity acquittees, (5) revocation of conditional release status of insanity acquittees, and (6) additional areas of insanity defense research. Implications of the research for the insanity defense and cognate legal issues are proffered.