Judicial control over administration if not subservient is neither superior to legislative control

Judicial control is either through citizens or results in encroachment of well established predefined procedures of executive responsibility. In the constitutional scheme, and the idea of separation of powers, it is the legislature that must ensure executive accountability.

Parliamentary democracy ensures that it is the legislature which causes the formation of executive and hence to ensure the representative control it must be prima-facie the legislature and not the judiciary. Also judiciary control creates a conflict between elected representatives and selected representatives.

Judicial control also indicates that citizen’s trust in representative institutions is being eroded. For example, judicial encroachment in the area of environmental governance has undermined the powers of the legitimate institutions. It has led to demoralizing effect on forest officials and representative institutions.

Judiciary should only intervene and not interfere. It should only play the role of a referee,  who has to monitor the executive and legislature.  It acts as a whistle-blower to stop the executive from overstepping its constitutional and statutory limitations.

As the judicial control is responsible for providing legal protection to the citizens of the country against the executive, in an indirect way, the judiciary does effect a certain amount of control on the legislative in a substantial way.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.