In a democratic countries, the judiciary is given a place of great significance. The court is a dispute resolving mechanism and it settles disputes and gives justice to cases between citizens and also between citizens and states and various organs of state. 

Doctrine of judicial review means that the constitution is the supreme law of the land and any law inconsistent therewith is void. In many countries with written constitution, for that constitution to be effective there needs to be an authoritative, independent and impartial arbitrator which restrains governmental organs from exercising powers which is not sanctioned by the constitution. 

Courts in Britain interpret laws, not the constitution, but in courts in a country with a written constitution, the courts interpret the provisions of the constitution and, thus, give meaning to the cold letter of the constitution.  

Courts act as the Supreme interpreter, protector and guardian of the supremacy of the constitution by keeping all authorities—legislative, executive, administrative, judicial within legal bounds. The judiciary has the responsibility to scrutinize all governmental actions in order to assess whether or not they are following the rules and laws set within the constitution. 

the judiciary has the power as well as the obligation to protect the people’s rights from any undue and unjustified encroachment by any organ of the State.in a federal system, the judiciary settles disputes between centre and states and also between states. Federalism is a legalistic form of government and because of distribution of power between centre and states by the constitution, an arbitrator is needed to draw a balance. 

A democratic society lives and functions by certain values, like individual liberty, human dignity, rule of law, constitutionalism, limited government, and it is the task of the judiciary to interpret the constitution and the law as to constantly inculcate these values on which democracy thrives. society does not stand still, instead social and economic conditions change continually. Therefore, the courts must interpret the constitution that it does not fall behind the times. The words of the constitution remain the same, but their significance changes from time to time through judicial interpretation. 

Judicial review 1) legitimizes governmental action and 2) protects the constitution from encroachment by the government. To what extent the judicial interpretation supplements the constitution depends on how creative and active role the courts play. Courts interpret the constitution and give that info. Through direct/indirect judicial review and in indirect judicial review, courts interpret the statutory language in a manner in which they steer clear of any unconstitutionality. this is a part of judicial strategy in deciding constitutional controversies. When a judge faced with several alternative interpretations of a constitutional provision, he chooses one of these and performs a ‘law-making’ function. British courts often resort to indirect judicial review to protect civil liberties.  

The constitution of Canada and Australia has no provision for judicial review yet it is an integral part of the constitutional process. During colonial rule, they had to follow British rule which were subject to judicial review and they followed it. after independence this doctrine became a part of their legal fabric and there was no need to provide a special provision for that.  

This doctrine is also an important part of American judicial system although no provision explicitly mentions it. Before 1803, the legislation of the American colonies was subject to judicial review. After 1803, in the famous case of marbury v madison, U.S. supreme court held that it had power of judicial review and would use this power to check the constitutionality of the acts passed by congress. 

The very essence of Judicial duty is that If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. if a law is in opposition to the constitution or if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, the Court must decide that case conformably to the law disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution disregarding the law; the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. Supreme courts in U.S. have power to say whether a law is constitutional or not. When there is a conflict between constitution and legislative statute, courts will follow the former and declare the latter unconstitutional. When a law is in opposition to the constitution, it is the duty of the courts to follow the constitution and not the law. 

there can be no constitution without judicial review. It provides the only safeguard that protects us against unconstitutional legislation. 

In Britain, this doctrine was not fully operational. During conflicts between the crown and the parliament, when the judges sided with the parliament, they accepted the theory of parliamentary sovereignty. This was then exercised in the overseas colonies. All law students are taught that Parliamentary sovereignty is absolute. But it is the judges who have the last word. If they interpret an Act to mean the opposite of what it says, it is their view which represents the law.  Some have asserted that judicial review is undemocratic as the judges who declare statutes unconstitutional are neither elected by, nor are responsible to, the people. 

A written constitution is meaningless without an independent organ which interprets and expounds (explain in detail) and enforces these laws. Without an authority to interpret the constitution, a written constitution would promote a lot of fighting rather than order in society when different organs of government take conflicting action in the name of the constitution. 

The legislature and executive and committed to certain policies which they wish to implement, therefore they can’t be trusted with the power of constitutional interpretation as they would use it to bend the constitution to further their own views and accommodate their own policies. The judiciary is politically neutral and can give non-political outlook on constitutional interpretation. The courts act as umpire in constitutional controversies. Without the judicial role of constitutional interpretation, fundamental rights would lose their value and power between centre and state would become unstable.  

In Britain there is demand for a written constitution with judicial review because judicial review promotes constitutionalism. Constitutionalism denotes a constitution not only of powers but also restraints as well. “Constitutionalism has one essential quality: it is a legal limitation on government; its opposite is despotic government, the government of will instead of law” Judicial Review is the cornerstone of constitutionalism. 

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.