I have expressed my views about the Pakistan Supreme Court and its need to maintain judicial self restraint in articles published in this newspaper and elsewhere. However‚ in view of the turmoil currently prevailing in Pakistan‚ a clear elaborate enunciation of the philosophy of judicial restraint is called for. In a recent statement‚ the Chief Justice has said that it is the Constitution‚ not Parliament‚ which is supreme in the country. There is no controversy about this legal position‚ and indeed
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Felix Frankfurter Harvard Law Review
controversy of judicial review which at extreme points‚ is called judicial activism‚ is a concept new to India. Judicial review can be defined as the judiciary‚ in the exercise of its own independence‚ checking and cross checking the working of the other organs of the government‚ while trying to uphold the ideal of ‘the rule of law’. Judicial activism more reformist in character is often confused with judicial review. According to Black’s Law Dictionary‚ judicial activism is “a philosophy of judicial decision-making
Premium Law Separation of powers Judicial review
Judicial Activism Active Judiciary‚ passive executive In normal circumstances‚ judicial activism should not be encouraged. But the circumstances are not normal. The political system is in a mess. In several areas‚ there is a situation to administrative paralysis. Take the recent Hawala case‚ which is a good example of judicial activism. What transpired in this case is very instructive. In this case the prime minister’s name was also involved‚ and
Premium Separation of powers Supreme Court of the United States Judicial review
Danyal Hasnain Justice Fazal Karim Constitutional Law 11th December‚ 2014. Assignment # 3 Question 1(a) Judicial review is usually defined as the judicial power in action or the practical aspect of the rule of law. It is defined as a doctrine according to which courts are entitled‚ in the exercise of the ‘judicial power’ of the State. The power of judicial review entails the authority to examine and decide the question of the constitutional validity of any law‚ irrespective of whether it comes from
Premium United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States Law
In the 1825 case of Eakin v. Raub‚ Pennsylvania Justice John Bannister Gibson declared that the judicial branch of the government had no right to influence or control the actions of any other branch of the government. Thus‚ Justice Gibson declared the act of judicial review unconstitutional and in disagreement with the proper role of the judiciary as inherently defined by the constitution. The proper roles and powers of the judiciary branch of the government‚ as conveyed to it by the constitution
Free Law Separation of powers Constitution
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND JUDICIAL SUPREMACY: A PARADIGM OF CONSTITUTIONALISM IN NIGERIA. By A.T.Shehu‚ PhD( ABSTRACT This paper examines judicial review and judicial power in Nigeria under the 1999 Constitution in relation to the constitution itself and in relation to the political branches of government. This is essentially to locate where lays supremacy between the branches and the judiciary particularly the Supreme Court with its final appellate jurisdiction. Judicial review and supremacy of the
Premium Separation of powers Law United States Constitution
“We all learn in school that the judicial‚ legislative and executive branches of government must check and balance each other. But other non state institutions must participate in this important system of checks and balances as well‚” stated by Alan Dershowitz. All of the branches should be checked on power by everyone. That is where Judicial review comes in‚ it is a check and balance on the Executive branch and the Legislative branch. Judicial review is an important part of our constitutional system
Premium Separation of powers Law Judicial review
Judicial activism believes that judges assume a role as independent policy makers on behalf of society that goes beyond their traditional role as interpreters of the Constitution and laws. Prior to the enactment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982‚ the duty of Supreme Court justices was to interpret law‚ not took it upon themselves to make law. Nevertheless‚ the Supreme Court justices play a more predominant role in shaping government policy and legislation today than they did
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law Judge
constitutional models of judicial review are the American and the European. Both these Constitutional models should be the manifestos of democracy and sovereignty of the people‚ but it is easily to deny this statement. In fact‚ we have to take into account that constitutions can be also negative for the consolidation of democracy. For instance‚ in many cases the authoritarian regimes use the constitution as support for them. Although‚ a democratic system would be against a certain type of judicial independence
Premium Law Separation of powers United States
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND THE INDIAN COURTS Literally the notion of judicial review means the revision of the decree or sentence of an inferior court by a superior court. Judicial review has a more technical significance in pubic law‚ particularly in countries having a written constitution which are founded on the concept of limited government. Judicial review in this case means that Courts of law have the power of testing the validity of legislative as well as other governmental action with reference
Premium United States Constitution Law Supreme Court of the United States