Judicial Review

Judicial review is a fundamental aspect of many legal systems, providing a mechanism through which the actions of the executive, legislative, or administrative branches of government are subject to review by the judiciary. This process serves as a critical check and balance, ensuring that laws and actions do not violate constitutional provisions or overstep legal boundaries.

Historical Background

The concept of judicial review traces its roots back to the establishment of constitutional governance. One of the earliest landmark cases establishing judicial review was Marbury v. Madison, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1803. This case established the precedent that American courts have the power to strike down laws, statutes, and some government actions that they find to violate the Constitution of the United States.

Judicial Review in Different Jurisdictions

United States

In the United States, judicial review is an integral part of the constitutional framework. It allows the judiciary, specifically the Supreme Court, to invalidate statutes and governmental actions that violate constitutional principles. This process has been pivotal in shaping American legal and political landscapes throughout history.

India

In India, judicial review is enshrined in the Constitution of India, empowering the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. This power ensures that all laws and treaties comply with the constitutional mandates.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, judicial review is part of constitutional law allowing individuals to challenge the legality of public bodies' decisions. While the UK does not have a written constitution like the US or India, its legal principles are derived from statutes, common law, and historical documents such as the Magna Carta.

Canada

In Canada, judicial review is used to ensure that administrative decisions comply with the legal framework. Canadian courts play a vital role in interpreting laws and ensuring that governmental bodies act within their lawful authority.

Other Jurisdictions

Countries like Bangladesh, Israel, and the Philippines also have mechanisms of judicial review that reflect their unique legal traditions and constitutional requirements. For example, in Bangladesh, Article 102 of its constitution allows for writ petitions challenging governmental actions.

The Role of Judicial Activism

Judicial activism is a related concept wherein judges are perceived to exercise their power to promote social change or to interpret laws in a way that reflects contemporary values, rather than strictly adhering to existing statutes. This philosophy can be controversial as it may lead to debates over the balance between judicial interpretation and legislative intent.