In: Operations Management
The judicial system keeps a check on the legislature thru
judicial activism . In fact, it is their responsibility to resolve
such issues which trouble the society. According to the
advocates of this notion , the judicial system intervenes only when
the parliament fails to do its job. The government may consume too
much time in enacting a law relating to certain contentious /
debatable social reforms.
According to a different viewpoint, judicial activism is
inconsistent to the notion of separation of powers.
The legislature is elected by the populace, & the elected reps
are assigned the role of legislating. On the other hand, the
members of the judicial system aren’t elected by the populace,
& aren’t meant to legislate. The judiciary can be
indiscriminate / unfair. Although the government has 3 organs, the
courts have the ultimate say in issues of dispute. There’s no other
authority higher than the Supreme Court. Hence, restraint is
desirable when applying that power.
In brief, both the notions of judicial activism & judicial
restraint have their own pros & cons. However, juries
nullifying any unconstitutional laws for protecting public interest
can’t be considered as intrusion into the dominion of the
legislature