An analysis on genesis of Judicial Review
An Analysis on the Genesis of Judicial Review
1. Introduction to Judicial Review
Judicial Review is the power of courts to examine the actions of the legislative and executive branches of government to ensure they comply with the Constitution and law. It protects citizens against unlawful, arbitrary, or unconstitutional acts of administration.
2. Genesis of Judicial Review
The origin of judicial review lies in the principle that the Constitution is supreme and that all government action must conform to it. If legislation or executive acts exceed constitutional authority, courts have the duty to invalidate them.
Historical Background
Early Roots in England: Although English courts traditionally accepted parliamentary sovereignty (meaning no court could overrule an Act of Parliament), judicial review in the form of reviewing administrative actions grew from the writ system and common law principles.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) (USA): Widely regarded as the foundational case for judicial review globally.
Adoption in Commonwealth and other countries: Judicial review evolved as part of constitutional checks and balances.
3. Key Principles in the Genesis of Judicial Review
Supremacy of the Constitution: No law or administrative action can contravene the constitutional provisions.
Separation of Powers: Courts have the authority to review executive and legislative actions.
Protection of Fundamental Rights: Judicial review is a shield to protect individual rights.
Rule of Law: All actions of the government must be lawful and subject to legal scrutiny.
4. Landmark Cases Illustrating the Genesis and Evolution of Judicial Review
1. Marbury v. Madison (1803) (USA)
Facts: William Marbury petitioned the US Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus to compel the delivery of his judicial commission.
Holding: Chief Justice John Marshall declared that the provision of the Judiciary Act enabling this writ was unconstitutional.
Significance:
Established the doctrine of judicial review in the US.
Confirmed that courts can declare statutes unconstitutional.
Set a precedent for constitutional supremacy and court's power to check legislative and executive acts.
2. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) (India)
Facts: Challenge to amendments curtailing property rights and fundamental rights.
Holding: The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution but cannot alter its basic structure.
Significance:
Laid down the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Confirmed the power of judicial review over constitutional amendments.
Reinforced the idea that the Constitution is supreme, and courts are guardians of its core principles.
3. A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982) (India)
Facts: Questioned the constitutional validity of certain preventive detention laws.
Holding: The Supreme Court held that judicial review applies to administrative actions to ensure they comply with constitutional provisions.
Significance:
Extended judicial review to administrative actions, emphasizing protection of fundamental rights.
Reinforced that no administrative action is above the law.
4. Anisminic Ltd. v. Foreign Compensation Commission (1969) (UK)
Facts: Anisminic challenged a commission’s decision based on an error of law.
Holding: The House of Lords held that an error of law by a public body renders the decision null and void, and judicial review can intervene despite ouster clauses.
Significance:
Expanded scope of judicial review in UK administrative law.
Limited the effectiveness of ouster clauses.
Emphasized that courts ensure legality of administrative decisions.
5. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) (India)
Facts: Government impounded Maneka Gandhi’s passport without following proper procedure.
Holding: The Supreme Court ruled that the procedure established by law must be “just, fair and reasonable” under Article 21 (right to life and liberty).
Significance:
Expanded the scope of judicial review to include procedural fairness.
Highlighted the evolving nature of fundamental rights jurisprudence.
Marked a major step in protecting citizens against arbitrary administrative action.
5. Summary of the Evolution
| Case | Contribution to Judicial Review |
|---|---|
| Marbury v. Madison (1803) | Established judicial review doctrine and constitutional supremacy |
| Kesavananda Bharati (1973) | Basic Structure Doctrine, review over constitutional amendments |
| A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982) | Judicial review over administrative actions to protect rights |
| Anisminic Ltd. (1969) | Expanded review despite ouster clauses; error of law invalidates actions |
| Maneka Gandhi (1978) | Procedural fairness and expansive view of due process |
6. Conclusion
The genesis of judicial review is rooted in the fundamental need to uphold the supremacy of the constitution and the rule of law. Starting from the landmark Marbury v. Madison in the US, the doctrine evolved to include robust protections for fundamental rights, checks on administrative power, and limits on legislative authority.
Judicial review is an essential mechanism that preserves constitutional governance, prevents abuse of power, and ensures that government actions are lawful, reasonable, and just.
RELATED Blog
0 comments