Chapter 6: Role of the Judiciary
Choose the correct alternative and complete the following statement.
______ is the first country to create an Independent Judiciary.
OPTIONS
India
United States
United Kingdom
Soviet Union
The primary function of the judiciary is ______.
OPTIONS
making laws
executing laws
adjudication
make appointments
Identify the incorrect pair in every set, correct it and rewrite.
OPTIONS
Written Constitution - India
Judicial Review - United Kingdom
Independent Judiciary - United States
SOLUTION
Judicial Review- USA
State the appropriate concept for the given statement.
Petition regarding important public concern -
SOLUTION
Petition regarding important public concern - Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
The process of removal of judges -
SOLUTION
The process of removal of judges - Impeachment
Cases can be heard for the first time only in certain courts -
SOLUTION
Cases can be heard for the first time only in certain courts - Original Jurisdiction
Complete the concept map.
SOLUTION
State whether the following statement is true or false with reasons.
There is no need to approve appointment of judges by the Senate in the United States.
OPTIONS
True
False
SOLUTION
This statement is False.
Reason: The Judges of the Supreme Court of America and the courts subordinate to it are appointed by the President of the USA. These appointments can be confirmed only after the Senate gives it's approval.
In India judiciary is independent.
OPTIONS
True
False
SOLUTION
This statement is True.
Reason: Provisions for judicial independence are provided in the Indian Constitution. This includes provisions related to appointment, tenure, salary, and allowances, removal from office, etc., of judges so that the judiciary acts in a free and fair manner.
Explain the co-relation between the following.
Judiciary and Executive
SOLUTION
The judiciary and executive are both organs of the government. The main function of the executive is the implementation of laws and policies while the functions of the judiciary include interpretation of law and adjudication. In India, judges are appointed by the President (nominal executive). Traditionally, these appointments were made after consulting with the existing government (ministry). However, to maintain judicial independence, the collegium of judges recommends names for appointment to the President.
There are many instances where the executive is a party to a dispute either as the plaintiff or as the defendant. Given the power of the Government, any legal dispute between it and one or more citizens is usually unequal. There is a possibility that the Government would use it's powers to secure a favourable decision. This is where the independence of the Judiciary becomes important. An independent judiciary ensures that all those who appear before it is treated on an equal plane, and thus makes sure that ' decisions are in accordance with the law.
Supreme Court and High Court
SOLUTION
India has a single integrated judicial system, with the Supreme Court at the apex and followed by the High Courts in the States. The Supreme Court controls all courts and tribunals in the territory of India. The High Court controls and supervises the functioning of the subordinate courts e.g., District Courts, in it's territorial jurisdiction. The High Courts have Appellate jurisdiction, regarding decisions of the lower courts while Supreme Court can hear appeals in civil, criminal, and constitutional cases against decisions of the High Courts. Supreme Court has original Jurisdiction such as in disputes about the election of the President or Vice President which are it's exclusive jurisdiction. Both, Supreme Court and High Court have Writ Jurisdiction i.e., they can issue directives or writs such as Habeas Corpus in case of violation of a person's fundamental rights. In case of appointment of judges of High Courts, the President also consults the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
Express your opinion of the following.
Judiciary must have a leading role in the appointment of judges.
SOLUTION
One of the main ways to secure judicial independence relates to the appointment of the judges. A judiciary that works under government favour, fear, or pressure i.e., a 'committed judiciary' can never give impartial, fair decisions especially when the government is a party in any dispute. The judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the President of India who is expected to be politically neutral. However, according to the 42nd Amendment Act, the President acts on the aid and advice of the Union Ministry Hence, executive interference in judicial appointments is a real possibility. Since the 1990's, the Supreme Court ruled that the Judiciary must play a leading role in it's judicial appointments.
The Supreme Court set up a Collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges of the court which would recommend names to the President for appointment to the Supreme Court and the High Courts. The Government role in this process has now been minimised.
Judicial activism is significant today.
SOLUTION
Judiciary in India has started taking a wider view of its functions. For instance, the courts have allowed individuals to file petitions on matters of important public concern. Such cases are known as Public Interest Litigation (PILs). There have been instances where the courts of their own accord, without anyone complaining or filing a petition, have taken note of matters of public concern (Suo moto). This wider view taken by the Judiciary of it's functions has been termed as 'Judicial Activism'. In recent years, Judicial Activism has led to the courts examining the legality of the decision of the executive over a wide variety of issues including the ones referred to above. Moreover, in many instances, they have also either issued orders on what should be done over many issues or have directed the executive to take action about thE same in a specified time period.
There has been much debate over Judicial Activism. Some feel that the judiciary was compelled to intervene because the executive was not discharging its functions properly, while others believe that the courts are exceeding their powers by looking into matters which fall within the jurisdiction of the executive or legislative.
Answer the following in detail with reference to the given points.
Explain the process of judicial review?
meaning
need
when and where it started
Indian context
SOLUTION
Meaning: Judicial Review means the power of the Judiciary to examine if any law passed by the legislature or any executive policy or action is consistent with the Constitution or not, and if it is not then to declare it as unconstitutional and hence null and void.
Need: It becomes necessary to have an institution that would examine whether the laws are consistent with the Constitution or not. That institution should also have the power to declare any law found inconsistent with the Constitution to be invalid and therefore not to be implemented. This would prevent the Legislature from making laws that violate the Constitution. In democracies with written Constitutions, this power is vested in the Judiciary. The Judiciary is not involved in any way in the law-making process. It is an independent body. Hence it has been assigned this power.
When and where it started: The origins of the power of Judicial Review can be traced to a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America given in 1803 in a case known as Marbury vs Madison case. This was for the first time that the American Supreme Court declared a law passed by the United States Congress to be invalid on the grounds that it was inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. However, it must be noted that the American Constitution does not have any explicit provision that gives the Judiciary the power of Judicial Review. It is an implied power. Till date, the American Supreme Court's power of Judicial Review has been unchallenged. This is SC because it is accepted that such a power is necessary to retain the supremacy of the Constitution.
Indian Context: The Constitution of India does not explicitly provide the judiciary with the power o· Judicial Review. However, like in the United States, these powers are implied. The Supreme Court o; India has on many occasions declared laws passed by the Legislature as being inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore unconstitutional. In the Indian context, the real issue has been whethe1 the amendments to the Constitution can be held unconstitutional. The issue was settled by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). In its judgment, the Court stated that the Constitution of India had a 'Basic Structure'. The Constitutional Amendments passed by the Parliament have to be consistent with this 'Basic Structure', and if they are found to be not, then the Supreme Court would declare them unconstitutional. The power to declare any Amendments as unconstitutional rests only with the Supreme Court.
Balbharati Solutions for Political Science 11th Standard Maharashtra State Board Chapterwise List - Free
The answers for the Balbharati books are the best study material for students. These Balbharati Solutions for Political Science 11th Standard Maharashtra State Board will help students understand the concepts better.
• Chapter 2: Liberty and Rights
• Chapter 3: Equality and Justice
• Chapter 4: Constitutional Government
• Chapter 5: Concept of Representation
• Chapter 6: Role of the Judiciary
• Chapter 7: Public Administration
• Chapter 8: Development Administration
• Chapter 9: The world since 1945 - 1
• Chapter 10: The world since 1945 - 2
Balbharati Solutions for Class 11th Standard FYJC Maharashtra.
Organisation of Commerce and Management (OCM)
...
