Guest Column| Executive failings fuel judicial outreach
The executive should prioritise efficient administration, minimise corruption, and formulate policies that address the needs of the people. On the other hand, the judiciary should focus on streamlining procedures, improving efficiency, and upholding the highest ethical standards.
The Indian democratic parliamentary system empowers the executive, charging it with safeguarding public interest, ensuring natural justice, and upholding human rights within a meticulously drafted constitutional framework. Simultaneously, the judiciary is tasked with intervening when violations occur, preserving the rule of law. However, a growing concern surrounds judicial activism, where the judiciary appears to assume executive functions, a phenomenon exacerbated when the executive falters.
An illustrative example unfolded during the 1975 Emergency, marked by a government running amok and attempting to curtail judiciary powers. The apex court, however, responded to its constitutional duty and reaffirmed the doctrine of basic structure, asserting that even Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the country’s Constitution. While some may perceive this argument as far-fetched, it was necessary to uphold the Constitution during a tumultuous period of executive failures, prompting timely judicial review.
Later, as regional politics gained prominence through politically convenient coalitions, and benefits of economic growth did not percolate, public interest and natural justice became substantial issues. Politics became personalised interests conglomerated, and governance turned parochial. In response, instruments such as public interest litigation (PIL) and the doctrine of natural justice were innovated to counter this decline. PILs and natural justice became vital tools, preventing governments from acting solely against the common man’s interest for political gain, thereby curbing anarchic tendencies within the system. The enforcement of fundamental human rights became more pronounced than ever before.
Despite the positive impact of judicial interventions, contemporary concerns persist. Issues such as delayed justice, unaffordability, crowded courts, rising case pendency, an understaffed judiciary, lack of transparency in judicial appointments, and undetected violations continue to plague the system. The burden on the aggrieved common man to prove the truth while lies go unchecked raises questions about the efficacy of the executive and judicial systems.
Shared responsibility for ensuring justice
The executive and judiciary must diligently fulfil their charters to address these challenges and promote transparent and people-centric governance. They must foster a sense of justice for the common man to prevent avoidable judicial interventions. Elections and other democratic processes should focus on the country’s development, avoiding divisive sentiments. Religious issues should remain personal choices rather than political subjects, leaving these to societal organisations to tackle in keeping with their varying tenets.
Simultaneously, the judiciary must enhance transparency in its operations, simplifying rules, regulation, and recruitment procedures. While regulating the cost of justice and legal knowledge might prove difficult, efforts should be made to ensure it is accessible to the common man. Legal aid programmes and pro bono initiatives can be expanded to bridge the affordability gap.
The judiciary can also play a pivotal role in promoting legal discipline and socio-economic security by focusing on the quality implementation of the Constitution and laws. This can be achieved through faster disposal of cases, setting clear precedents, and ensuring adherence to the rule of law throughout the system.
Need for inclusivity in governance
Beyond the dichotomy of executive and judicial roles, the broader challenge lies in ensuring inclusivity in governance. Efforts should be made to leave no citizen behind, regardless of their socio-economic status, religion, or political affiliations. The failure of governance, whether by the executive or judiciary, contributes to the perception that justice is unaffordable and elusive for the common man. Representation of diverse voices in government and the judiciary is crucial for enacting policies that cater to the needs of the common man.
Furthermore, the complex nature of democratic governance requires a comprehensive approach. Elections should not merely be about winning votes but should serve as platforms for constructive debates on issues vital to national development. Political discourse should transcend divisive narratives, focusing on common ground rather than highlighting differences. Political parties must present and pursue agendas that foster a sense of informed participation in the democratic process.
Striking a balance for a just society
A transparent and accessible judiciary with affordable legal services is crucial. Clear rules, uncomplicated regulation, and straightforward recruitment procedures contribute to building public trust. It is imperative to strike a balance where justice is delivered fairly, transparently, and expeditiously. Delays in the judicial system erode public confidence and create a sense of helplessness among those seeking justice.
The change in paradigm towards more inclusive governance is imperative to bridge the gap between governments and the governed. The persistence of executive failures and judicial interventions underscores the need for a balanced and inclusive approach to governance. While historical examples showcase the importance of judicial activism in checking executive overreach, contemporary challenges demand proactive reforms in both branches. The executive should prioritise efficient administration, minimise corruption, and formulate policies that address the needs of the people. On the other hand, the judiciary should focus on streamlining procedures, improving efficiency, and upholding the highest ethical standards. A robust system of checks and balances, where each branch holds the other accountable, is vital for a healthy democracy. Transparency, accessibility, and affordability should be the cornerstones of both the executive and legal systems to achieve a more just and equitable society. And this can be achieved more effectively, by recognising the role of our vibrant civil society and media. sureshkumarnangia@gmail.com
The writer is a retired Punjab IAS officer. Views expressed are personal.