Question source is IASbaba website and all these answer I post there also.
The question of judicial activism vis a vis judicial overreach has cropped up yet again with few legislators having firm views against judicial adventurism. What is your opinion on this matter? Substantiate your views.
The several organs of Indian democracy has respective role to play and judiciary is one very special pillar of it. Constitution set judiciary a watchdog of individual rights and allotted authority of judicial review under article 13, 32, and 226. Rule making, rule execution, and rule interpretation are three different functions but when judiciary interfered in other two roles, it is called judicial activism. After 1970s the pattern of judicial activism has grown continuously because
1- Morality level in Indian politics has degraded continuously so poor legislative functioning.
2- Legislature and executives could not perform as per people expectations.
3- PILs which have special concern for poor and downtrodden gave solid reason to judiciary for judicial activism
4- Legislative decisions like IT act, NJAC bill, or Aadhar debate where question raised on fundamental rights, judiciary used activism to protect common people against state.
5- Executive failures like CBI performance in different scams, drought situation in different states, also demands judicial activism.
A very thin line separates judicial activism (very much needed) and judicial adventurism (not desirable) as reminded by many SC judges also in past. Judicial adventurism need to avoid
1- Because it disturbs balance in functioning of three organs
2- Judiciary itself overburdens so need not to take additional unwanted burden.
3- Not as per constitutional principles
4- It increases politicization of judiciary.
To restrict judicial adventurism is role of SC and HC but same time it fall upon legislative and executive also. It they do their function with integrity and honestly, judiciary need not to interfere into it. It is a introspective discussion for all three organs for welfare of people of India.
Promotion of swadeshi on one hand and initiatives to attract FDI on the other are not contradictory. Rather they merge together to form the greater policy environment to promote employment. Examine.
Gandhi Ji, Champion of Swaraj philosophy looked for a free India with self governing, self reliant, and sustained economy. After globalization a lot has been changed and so Swadeshi definition and understanding also need to rewrite. Today India is welcoming FDI from across the globe and same time pushing for “Make in India” which seems synonym to Swaraj.
Beyond doubt swadeshi is important for India today because
1- It helps to earn employment to second largest populated nation
2- It ensure country saving and money rotation within country.
3- It is a push for internal demand driven economy, a big yes when global economy is slowdown and RBI Governor asked for “Make for India”.
FDI and other external investments are tune to Swadshi concept because
1- Global experience shows more investment (like FDI) led development helped to bring poor people out of poverty trap rapidly than any other method. China and Singapore are shining examples.
2- FDI helps to get technology, information, other resources which a country may not be able to develop in short run. FDI in telecommunication sector is one example of it in India.
3- Advance Swadeshi movement is more about promotion of MSME industries which need market and financial support and for that also FDI is helpful.
There are arguments that LPG policies has hurt swadeshi movement and it cannot be deny totally so FDI need to be use as one of the tool with effective fiscal and monetary policy. FDI extended limit in many areas like insurance, retail, defense, and so on is one step ahead towards it.