The concept of judicial activism originated and developed in the USA. This term was first coined in 1947 by Arthur Schlesinger Jr., an American historian and educator.
In India, the doctrine of judicial activism was introduced in mid- 1970s. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, Justice P.N. Bhagwati, Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy and Justice D.A. Desai laid the foundations of judicial activism in the country.
Key Features of Judicial Activism in India
Protection of Rights:
- Judicial activism focuses on the protection of fundamental rights and ensuring justice for marginalized groups, such as women, children, laborers, and the poor.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL):
- PIL allows individuals or groups to approach the courts on behalf of those who cannot access the courts themselves, seeking relief for violations of public or social interests.
- It enables the judiciary to take up issues of public concern, such as environmental protection, human rights violations, and corruption.
Flexible Procedures:
- The judiciary has adopted a flexible approach in hearing and deciding PIL cases, often relaxing traditional legal procedures and rules of standing.
Assertive Role:
- Through judicial activism, the judiciary asserts itself against potential excesses or failures of the executive and legislative branches.
Landmark Cases:
➤ The Indian judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, has made several landmark decisions in the area of judicial activism. Some notable cases include:
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Expanded the interpretation of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): Established guidelines for preventing sexual harassment in the workplace.
- MC Mehta v. Union of India (1986): Addressed environmental concerns and emphasized the need for pollution control.
Human Rights and Social Justice:
- Judicial activism has contributed significantly to the enforcement of human rights and social justice. For example, the Supreme Court has intervened in matters related to bonded labor, prisoners' rights, and the right to education.
Criticism
While judicial activism has been praised for promoting justice and protecting rights, it has also faced criticism for allegedly overstepping its bounds and infringing on the domains of the legislature and executive.
