Independence of Judiciary
In India, the question of the independence of the judiciary has been a subject of heated national debates and articles over the last many years. It has exercised the minds of legislators, jurists, and politicians. Both the supporters and the opponents have cogent arguments in support of their views. This question assumes great importance whenever the Supreme Court holds a particular Act passed by the parliament of the constitution or whenever Government supersedes any person while making appointments of the judges of the High Courts or the Supreme Courts.
The supporters of absolute independence of the judiciary argue that in the absence of an independent judiciary, democracy cannot succeed. Before we discuss how the independence of the judiciary is maintained in India, it is essential to explain what do we mean by the term “Independence of Judiciary”. In the words of Dr. V.K. Rao, “Independence of Judiciary has three meanings:
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
- The judiciary must be free from encroachment from other organs in its sphere. In this respect, it is called separation of powers. Our Constitution makes the judiciary absolutely independent except in certain matters where the Executive heads are given some powers of remission.
- It means the freedom of judgment and freedom from legislative interference. In this respect, our constitutional position in not very happy because the legislature can in some respects override the decision of the judiciary by legislation. The income-tax Amendment ordinance of 1954 is an example.
- The decision of the judiciary should not be influenced by either the executive or the legislature it means freedom from both, fear and favor of the other two organs.
Independence of the Judiciary is necessitated not because of eagerness on the part of the people to treat judges as favored members of the public services. It is essential for maintaining purity of justice in the social system and enabling them to earn public confidence in the administration of justice.
The first political philosopher, who propounded the idea of an independent judiciary, was Montesquieu, the famous French philosopher. He believed in the theory of separation of powers of the three branches of the Government these are Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary. The fathers of the American Constitution were impressed by his theory. They, therefore, established an independent judiciary in the country. The American people have great faith in the independence of the judiciary. They are convinced that if any fetters are placed on the independence of the judiciary, the rights and liberties of the people might be endangered.
In the United Kingdom, however, the Parliament is supreme. The Judiciary, there has not separated from the legislature. In fact, there the House of Lords acts as the highest Court of appeal. Although in the U.K., the judiciary has not been independent or supreme, yet its judges have been giving decisions without fear or favor on matters coming up before them. They have been independent and impartial in their Judgements. The U.K. does not have a written constitution but still, its people enjoy no less liberty than the Americans. In the U.K. no major clash between the parliament and the judiciary has occurred so far.
In India, the Constitution has spelled out the fundamental rights of the people and made the judiciary independent so that it can safeguard and uphold these rights. If experience is any guide, the Supreme Court has invariably shown a high degree of independence in giving its judgment. Some of its judgments even went against the Government. The Supreme Court is held in high esteem by the parliament, the government, and the people of India for its role in protecting and guarding the rights and liberties of the citizens, advising the government on complex constitutional issues, dispensing justice to the people, awarding, confirming, reducing or enhancing the punishment awarded by lower courts to the criminals.
The objective of independence of the judiciary
Independence of Judiciary is sine guenon of democracy. In a democratic polity, the supreme power of the state is shared among the three principle organs of constitutional functionaries namely the constitutional task assigned to the Judiciary is no way less than that of other functionaries legislature and executive. Indeed it is the role of the Judiciary to carry out the constitutional message and it is its responsibility to keep a vigilant watch over the functioning of democracy in accordance with the dictates, directives, and imperative commands of the constitution by checking the excessive authority of other constitutional functionaries beyond the ken of constitution. So the Judiciary has to act as the sentinel. Our Constitution does not strictly adhere to the doctrine of separation of powers but it does provide for the distribution of power to ensure that one organ of the govt. does not trench on the constitutional powers of other organs. The distribution of powers concept assumes the existence of a judicial system free from external as well as internal presses. Under our Constitute the Judiciary has been assigned the onerous task of safeguarding the fundamental rights of our citizens and upholding the Rule of Law. Since the courts are entrusted with the duty to uphold the constitution and the laws, it very often comes in conflict with the state when it dries to enforce orders by exacting obedience. Therefore, the need for an independent t and impartial Judiciary manned by persons of sterling quality and character, underlying courage and determination and resolution impartiality and independence who would dispose of justice without fear fervor, ill will, or affection. Justice without fear or fervor, ill will, or affection, is the cordial creed of our constitution and a solemn assurance of every Judge to the people of this great country.
Stuck on your essay?
