Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2) The judiciary alone cannot take forward the mission of deepening democracy and protecting social freedoms in India. Do you agree? Comment. (250 words)

Topic – Separation of powers between various organs dispute redressal mechanisms and institutions.

2) The judiciary alone cannot take forward the mission of deepening democracy and protecting social freedoms in India. Do you agree? Comment. (250 words)

The hindu

Why this question

India is the world’s largest democracy with one of the most proactive and forward looking higher judiciary. Indian judiciary has largely defended the constitution and its values very well in the face of a challenging political atmosphere and regressive socioeconomic conditions. However it has its limits and needs to be complemented by political and societal efforts as discussed by the article.

Directive word

Comment- here we have to express our knowledge and understanding of the issue and form an overall opinion thereupon.

Key demand of the question.

The question wants us to express our opinion as to whether or not the judiciary alone can take forward the mission of deepening democracy and protecting social freedoms in India. We have to form our opinion based on a proper discussion and backed by sufficient arguments/ facts/ examples.

Structure of the answer

Introduction- write a few introductory lines about India’s vital democratic institutions- The legislature and the executive; the judiciary; the press; and the civil society.

Body-

Discuss the reforms brought by Indian judiciary and its efforts towards deepening the democracy in India and protecting social freedoms of its citizens. E.g briefly discuss the slew of verdicts by the Supreme Court, on triple talaq, Section 377, adultery, and the Sabarimala temple. Also mention the ruling on right to privacy and briefly discuss the role played by PILs in strengthening democracy and protecting social freedoms in India.

Bring out the need for other institutions like the legislatures and the executive, the civil society, the press to supplement the efforts of the judiciary. E.g On the one hand there is a complete abnegation of the role of the legislature, and on the other there is a dichotomy between social morality and judicial morality (itself an interpretation of constitutional morality); If the judiciary has assumed the role of the single most important pillar of India’s parliamentary democracy, built on separation of powers, it is mainly because of the degradation and abuse of the roles of the legislature and the the executive, the press and the civil society; Parliament, instead of representing the highest democratic ethos, panders to electoral majorities, leaving it incapable of challenging barbaric social/religious practices enforced by dominant interests; the judiciary does not exist in a vacuum. Even when it attempts to correct regressive social practices, it is still a reflection of our society. Nothing could be more illustrative of this than the serious lack of diversity and representation, especially in the higher judiciary etc.

Conclusion– based on your discussion, form a fair and a balanced conclusion on the given issue.