The power of the Judicial Review is considered as the touchstone to test constitutionality of the state action including legislation. It brings life and dynamism to the constitutional system. It brings about constitutional clarity and fulfills any gaps that may arise in the constitution. Judicial review controls the arbitrariness of government and protects civil liberties by maintaining the rule of law. The judicial review is exercised to make state organs and bodies as well as government and public officials disciplined and accountable. It is the foundation of constitutional government. The scope of judicial review can be categorized as judicial review of legislation, judicial review of executive action, and judicial review of judicial action. There are several grounds the judiciary can exercise its power. Compliance with the constitution and protection of civilian rights are the fundamental basis of judicial review. The grounds upon which state organs are subject to control by the judicial review have been classified as illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety. Its concern is whether a decision-making authority has exceeded its power, committed an error of law, committed a breach of rules of natural justice, and reached a decision without reasonable ground or by abusing its power. The concept of judicial review is not away from criticism. It is often said that judicial review is intolerably uncertain and amounts to little more than a license for judges to interfere arbitrarily with the machinery of government and administration. The power of judicial review has been criticized for being against democratic legitimacy. The question arises that is justifiable for the court to question the validity of the actions of the elected members of the parliament. This question makes the concept of judicial review as the most controversial feature of the Constitution. But this right is not an authority to make the court higher and more powerful than other organs, but it is a means to establish constitutional supremacy and rule of law.
| Published in | Advances in Sciences and Humanities (Volume 9, Issue 2) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16 |
| Page(s) | 52-57 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Judicial Review, Constitutionalism, Rule of Law, Civil Liberties, Supremacy of Constitution
| [1] | HENRY J. ABRAHAM, THE JUDICIAL PROCESS (3rd ed.), Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 280 (1978). |
| [2] | M. P. JAIN, INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (4th ed.), Wadhwa and Co., Nagpur, 4 (1998). |
| [3] | BRAIN THOMPSON, TEXTBOOK ON CONSTITUTIONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, Blackstone Press, Oregon 342 (1993). |
| [4] | V. G. RAMCHANDRAN'S LAW OF WRITS (6th ed.) (Revised by Justice C. K. Thakker and M. C. Thakker), Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 666 (2006, Reprinted 2019 with supplement 2017). |
| [5] | DR. BHIMARJUN ACHARYA, COMPARATIVE SYSTEM OF JUDICIAL REVIEW, A. K. Books and Educational Enterprises, Kathmandu, 12 (2012). |
| [6] | Ganesh Panjiyar vs. Judicial Council et al., NKP 2067 Vol. 3 DN 8329. |
| [7] | A. V. DICEY, INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE LAW OF THE CONSTITUTION (8th ed.) Liberty Fund, Inc., Indiana, 202 (1915). |
| [8] | R. K. Jain vs. Union of India (1993) 4 SCC 119 (168). |
| [9] | MOHAN PRASAD BANJADE, CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND JUDICIAL REVIEW (SAMBAIDHANIK ADHIKAR RA NYAYIK PUNARABLOKAN), Meera Banjade, Kathmandu, 11 (2046). |
| [10] | Uttam Shrestha vs. OPMCM et al., NKP 2070 Vol. 10 DN 9059. |
| [11] | S. P. SATHE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (7th ed.), LexisNexis, New York, 249 (2012). |
| [12] | Nawaraj Silwal vs. OPMCM et al, NKP 2073 Vol. 1 DN 9723. |
| [13] | Annapurna Rana vs. Kathmandu. District Court et al., NKP 2055 Vol. 8 DN 6588. |
| [14] | N. R. MADHAVA MENON (ed.), RULE OF LAW IN A FREE SOCIETY, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, in preface (2008). |
| [15] | Bhimarjun Acharya, Judiciary: A Guardian of the Constitution, ESSAYS ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, Nepal Law Society, Kathmandu, Vol. 30/31, 177 (1999). |
| [16] | CHARLES H. MCILWAIN, CONSTITUTIONALISM: ANCIENT AND MODERN, Lawbook Exchange Ltd., New Jersey, 22 (1940). |
| [17] | Purnaman Sakya, Constitutionalism: Infrastructure of Good Governance, NRIPADHOJ NIROULA et al. (eds.), FOUNDATIONS OF DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTION (LOKTANTRIK SAMBIDHANKA AADHARHARU), Aagrasarathi, 2 (2065). |
| [18] | www.legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/judicial+review, excessed on December 16, 2020. |
| [19] | Warren L. Burger, The Doctrine of Judicial Review, ESSAYS ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, Vol. 8, Nepal Law Society, 17 (1991). |
| [20] | Council of Civil Service Union et al., v Minister for the Civil Service [1984] 3 All ER 935. |
| [21] | RICHARD GORDON QC & TIM WARD, JUDICIAL REVIEW, Cavendish Publishing Limited, London, 175 (2000). |
| [22] | H. W. R. WADE & C. F. FORSYTH, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (9th ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 35 (2007). |
| [23] | T. EMERY AND B. SMYTHE, JUDICIAL REVIEW, Sweet and Maxwell, London, 17 (1986). |
| [24] | A. K. Budrul Hug, Judicial Obligation: Judicial Activism, PURNA MAN SHAKYA (ed.), REPORT OF EIGHTH SAARC LAW CONFERENCE, SAARC Law, Nepal, Kathmandu, 207-217 (2002). |
APA Style
Shyam Kumar Bhattarai. (2023). Conceptual Framework of Judicial Review with Reference to Nepal. Advances in Sciences and Humanities, 9(2), 52-57. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16
ACS Style
Shyam Kumar Bhattarai. Conceptual Framework of Judicial Review with Reference to Nepal. Adv. Sci. Humanit. 2023, 9(2), 52-57. doi: 10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16
AMA Style
Shyam Kumar Bhattarai. Conceptual Framework of Judicial Review with Reference to Nepal. Adv Sci Humanit. 2023;9(2):52-57. doi: 10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16,
author = {Shyam Kumar Bhattarai},
title = {Conceptual Framework of Judicial Review with Reference to Nepal},
journal = {Advances in Sciences and Humanities},
volume = {9},
number = {2},
pages = {52-57},
doi = {10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ash.20230902.16},
abstract = {The power of the Judicial Review is considered as the touchstone to test constitutionality of the state action including legislation. It brings life and dynamism to the constitutional system. It brings about constitutional clarity and fulfills any gaps that may arise in the constitution. Judicial review controls the arbitrariness of government and protects civil liberties by maintaining the rule of law. The judicial review is exercised to make state organs and bodies as well as government and public officials disciplined and accountable. It is the foundation of constitutional government. The scope of judicial review can be categorized as judicial review of legislation, judicial review of executive action, and judicial review of judicial action. There are several grounds the judiciary can exercise its power. Compliance with the constitution and protection of civilian rights are the fundamental basis of judicial review. The grounds upon which state organs are subject to control by the judicial review have been classified as illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety. Its concern is whether a decision-making authority has exceeded its power, committed an error of law, committed a breach of rules of natural justice, and reached a decision without reasonable ground or by abusing its power. The concept of judicial review is not away from criticism. It is often said that judicial review is intolerably uncertain and amounts to little more than a license for judges to interfere arbitrarily with the machinery of government and administration. The power of judicial review has been criticized for being against democratic legitimacy. The question arises that is justifiable for the court to question the validity of the actions of the elected members of the parliament. This question makes the concept of judicial review as the most controversial feature of the Constitution. But this right is not an authority to make the court higher and more powerful than other organs, but it is a means to establish constitutional supremacy and rule of law.},
year = {2023}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Conceptual Framework of Judicial Review with Reference to Nepal AU - Shyam Kumar Bhattarai Y1 - 2023/05/31 PY - 2023 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16 DO - 10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16 T2 - Advances in Sciences and Humanities JF - Advances in Sciences and Humanities JO - Advances in Sciences and Humanities SP - 52 EP - 57 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2472-0984 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20230902.16 AB - The power of the Judicial Review is considered as the touchstone to test constitutionality of the state action including legislation. It brings life and dynamism to the constitutional system. It brings about constitutional clarity and fulfills any gaps that may arise in the constitution. Judicial review controls the arbitrariness of government and protects civil liberties by maintaining the rule of law. The judicial review is exercised to make state organs and bodies as well as government and public officials disciplined and accountable. It is the foundation of constitutional government. The scope of judicial review can be categorized as judicial review of legislation, judicial review of executive action, and judicial review of judicial action. There are several grounds the judiciary can exercise its power. Compliance with the constitution and protection of civilian rights are the fundamental basis of judicial review. The grounds upon which state organs are subject to control by the judicial review have been classified as illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety. Its concern is whether a decision-making authority has exceeded its power, committed an error of law, committed a breach of rules of natural justice, and reached a decision without reasonable ground or by abusing its power. The concept of judicial review is not away from criticism. It is often said that judicial review is intolerably uncertain and amounts to little more than a license for judges to interfere arbitrarily with the machinery of government and administration. The power of judicial review has been criticized for being against democratic legitimacy. The question arises that is justifiable for the court to question the validity of the actions of the elected members of the parliament. This question makes the concept of judicial review as the most controversial feature of the Constitution. But this right is not an authority to make the court higher and more powerful than other organs, but it is a means to establish constitutional supremacy and rule of law. VL - 9 IS - 2 ER -
Information
Email: