PSIR 8c. Do you agree that over the years the Supreme Court has become a forum for policy evolution? Justify your answer. UPSC 2023, 15 Marks

Introduction:

The role of the Supreme Court of India in shaping and influencing policy has been a subject of debate and discussion. This content aims to explore whether the Supreme Court has indeed evolved into a forum for policy evolution.

The Supreme Court as a Forum for Policy Evolution:

1. Landmark Judgments as Policy Initiatives:

The Supreme Court, through its judgments, has often taken up issues that are of significant policy relevance.

Landmark judgments, such as the Vishakha case (1997) on sexual harassment at workplaces, have led to the formulation of new policies and guidelines.

2. Protection of Fundamental Rights:

The Court plays a crucial role in safeguarding fundamental rights, which often have direct implications for policy.

Cases related to the right to privacy, right to education, and right to a clean environment have led to policy changes and legislative action.

3. Public Interest Litigation (PIL):

PILs have been instrumental in bringing various policy issues before the Court.

The Court has used PILs to address concerns related to environmental protection, healthcare, and public welfare, influencing policy decisions.

Criticism and Controversies:

1. Judicial Overreach:

Critics argue that the Court, at times, oversteps its boundaries and ventures into the domain of the executive and legislature.

This is seen as encroachment on the separation of powers.

2. Policy Formulation vs. Implementation:

While the Court can influence policy formulation, the effectiveness of policy implementation remains a challenge.

Policy decisions often require detailed deliberation, which the Court's judgments might not fully address.

Thinkers' Perspectives:

1. Proponents of Judicial Activism:

Some argue that judicial activism is essential for upholding constitutional values and filling policy vacuums.

They view the Court's role in policy evolution as a safeguard against legislative inaction.

2. Critics of Judicial Activism:

Critics believe that the Court should limit its role to interpreting laws and not delve into policy matters.

They argue that policy decisions should be left to elected representatives.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court of India has, over the years, played a role in policy evolution, especially in matters related to fundamental rights and public interest. However, this role is not without controversy and criticism. Whether one agrees with the Court's active involvement in policy matters depends on the perspective taken, and the debate on this issue remains ongoing.