What's New :
21st May 2024 (15 Topics)

Critical Times Call for Strong Judicial Adjudication

You must be logged in to get greater insights.

Context

Supreme Court to Scrutinize Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA)

Concerns over CAA Rules:

  • Uncertainty for Rejected Applicants: The CAA Rules are vague about what happens to those whose applications for citizenship are denied, raising fears they might be sent to detention centers.
  • Dual Citizenship Issues: Concerns have been raised about foreign applicants retaining dual citizenship, which contradicts the spirit of the parent Act.
  • Need for Judicial Clarity: The Supreme Court's involvement is crucial to address these ambiguities and ensure constitutional compliance.

Challenges to Legislative Presumption (Judicial Role and Legislative Malice)

  • Presumption of Validity: Traditionally, laws made by Parliament are presumed valid unless proven unconstitutional, limiting courts' ability to interdict.
  • Populist Legislation Risks: Populist regimes may introduce targeted legislation, requiring a more assertive judicial approach to maintain constitutional integrity.
  • Case Examples: The Court's failure to stay certain controversial laws, like demonetization and the dilution of Kashmir's special status, illustrates the risks of not intervening promptly.

Need for Proactive Judicial Review

  • Indian Precedents: The Supreme Court has previously stayed laws deemed contentious, such as the OBC quota and farm laws, demonstrating its capacity for proactive judicial intervention.
  • Timely Judicial Action: To uphold constitutional values, the judiciary must act swiftly and decisively against laws that are clearly unconstitutional or divisive.
Mains Question:

Discuss the role of the judiciary in scrutinizing laws that may be constitutionally dubious or targeted against specific communities.

Verifying, please be patient.

Enquire Now