Judicial Intervention Research Articles

Judicial Oversight of Labour Arbitration Awards

This paper investigates the scope and limitations of judicial oversight in labour arbitration awards, focusing on the balance between arbitration autonomy and the need for judicial intervention. The research addresses the central question: To what extent should courts intervene in arbitration awards in the labour sector? Through a doctrinal analysis of statutes, case law, and scholarly perspectives, the paper evaluates how judicial oversight impacts labour arbitration, particularly in Nigeria, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Findings indicate that while judicial intervention is essential to ensure fairness and compliance with public policy, excessive involvement can undermine the efficiency and finality of the arbitration process. The study concludes that an optimal balance between judicial oversight and the autonomy of arbitration is critical to maintaining a functional and just labour arbitration system.

A Critical Analysis on Constitutional Remedies in Administrative Actions in India.

This research delves into the flaws within the Indian administrative actions with helps of administrative law and Constitutional remedies through judicial supremacy of judicial review system pertaining to the administrative actions and propose potentials reforms for improvements. Given the intricate bureaucracy and evolving regulatory landscape of the Indian administrative framework, a robust and efficient mechanism for judicial oversight becomes imperative. Delays in adjudication, limited access to justice, inconsistent review standards, and the imperative for heightened transparency and accountability are some of the flaws that have been identified. Actually, the problem of administrative action is very complex. It is correctly said that absolutely corrupts absolutely. It leads to arbitrariness in many situations. So, in India the Art.14 which the significant one of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to Indian citizens and is also considered to be the beauty of the Indian Constitution acts as a major check to this arbitrariness arising due to administrative discretion of bias, affirmative action and etc. The study aims comprehensively comprehend existing shortcomings through a meticulous analysis of these challenges. Proposed reforms encompass procedural improvements, legislative modifications and judicial interventions. Evaluation is conducted to ascertain the viability of specialised administrative tribunals, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms and standardized review criteria for stream lining the judicial review process. Additionally, the research explores the role of technology in expediting adjudication and promoting transparency. In alignment with the international standards, the study acknowledges the significance of public participation in administrative decision-making and the assimilation of global best practices. Emphasis is placed on maintaining alternative efficiency while ensuring an effective review process. The research illuminates the intricate interplay between judicial activism and restraint, illustrating how diverse philosophies impact the extent of court exercised review powers. By critically examining these reforms, the study seeks to contribute vital insights to the ongoing discourse on augmenting the judicial review.

“The Age of Malice”: Estupro, Consent, and the Foundations of Victim Blaming in the Criminal Courts of Buenos Aires, 1853–1878

This article examines the judicial treatment of pubescent, female victims of sexual assault in Buenos Aires, Argentina, between 1853 and 1878, dates that span the decades between the national constitution and the adoption by Buenos Aires Province of new penal legislation. Centering the case of 13-year-old Irene Mestosini, it analyzes the prosecution of estupro cases through the paradigm of rape culture and victim blaming. It exposes how, by casting pubescent girls as malicious because of their physical and mental development, authorities blamed them for their assault while dismissing men's aggressive sexuality. By illustrating the ways in which physiological development worked alongside legal cultures, class expectations, and heteronormative gender norms to create a culture of impunity around sexual assault, this article suggests that modern notions of acceptable and unacceptable sexuality emerged in Buenos Aires earlier than in other parts of Latin America, where honor remained a central concern well into the twentieth century.

Challenges and Frontiers in Intellectual Property Rights Amidst the Rise of Artificial Intelligence

This article investigates the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on intellectual property (IP) rights, addressing challenges in ownership and authorship of AI-generated creations while exploring legal and ethical dilemmas in traditional IP domains. It offers strategies for navigating these complexities, drawing on legal precedents, international agreements, and policy recommendations. The research emphasizes the urgent need for legislative updates to address these challenges effectively. Recommendations include the enactment of innovative constitutional provisions, updating IP legislation to encompass AI-related issues comprehensively, and advocating for effective judicial intervention. By implementing these strategies, Sri Lanka can foster a harmonious coexistence of AI and IP, ensuring the protection of intellectual property rights while stimulating innovation in the AI era.

A JUDICIALIZAÇÃO DO DIREITO À SAÚDE: ANÁLISE DOS REQUISITOS PARA CONCESSÃO DE LIMINARES

This study focuses on the analysis of the judicialization of the right to health, emphasizing the legal and practical implications arising from the granting of injunctions within the public health domain. The right to health, enshrined in the 1988 Federal Constitution as a fundamental social right, guarantees all citizens universal and equitable access to health services, a direct outcome of the Sanitary Reform that culminated in the establishment of the Unified Health System (SUS). The analysis was conducted through a review of literature, legislation, jurisprudence, and academic works about the theme, highlighting the consequences of this judicial intervention, which include significant financial impacts, an increase in inequalities regarding access to health services, and an overburdened judiciary. Subsequently, the phenomenon of judicialization of the right to health, intensified over the past few decades, is discussed considering its implications and consequences. This right has increasingly become the subject of judicial scrutiny, prompting interventions by the judiciary to ensure access to treatments, medications, and procedures. The consequences of judicialization to the right to health are multifaceted and include substantial financial impacts on the public budget. While judicialization seeks to ensure the effectiveness of the right to health and to fully protect citizens, its effects can be detrimental to the equilibrium of public health policies, affecting both equity and the sustainability of the system. As a result of this work, it is indicated that, to mitigate negative impacts, it is essential for judicial decisions to be made based on rigorous technical criteria and to be supported by robust evidence, such as medical reports. Furthermore, the responsibility for the implementation of judicial decisions should be tripartite, involving the Federal Government, States, and Municipalities, with procedural efficiency being necessary to prevent harm to citizens' health, thereby safeguarding the sustainability of the Unified Health System (SUS).

Capital Punishment Repeal in England: A Paradigm Shift towards Restorative Justice and Human Dignity

The inherent disgracefulness of death consciously inflicted upon a person by his fellows, may make the death sentence highly untenable, from a strict humanitarian prospective. It’s here where the concerned state authorities come into action and claim that if at all the death sentence is to be retained, its imposition must be with utmost human decency ensuring evolved standards. However, the movement away from brutal and cruel punishment has been a slow yet steady process. With the gradual evolving standards of human decency and dignity, the law needs to be changed with the changing dynamism of the dynamic society. Nonetheless, the American society, being one of the oldest civilizations in the world owes to itself that the agony at the exact point of execution should be kept to the minimum. This becomes more crucial when execution is the outcome of a judicial verdict. Courts play a vital role in major social reform, and that we as a society do have certain expectations from the very independent and impartial organ of the state. Moreover, history is a witness to significant social reforms bought by amendments to the prevalent law, through judicial process. Effective judicial intervention in social controversy requires a consensus on the goals and objectives of social change, at a time in history when as a society it is our failure to agree with the goals and purpose of social change that is one of the principal causes of social unrest. Judges have traditionally been very careful to emphasize that their role is not to make the law, merely to apply it. But it is apparent that judges play a significant role in the development of law through the interpretation of both common law principles and legislative provisions. The phrase “judicial responsibility” means not just the responsibility to uphold the law; it means the overarching responsibility to do justice. Courts should realize that as long as there is life, there is room for reform

Who Benefits from Mass Incarceration? A Stratification Economics Approach to the “Collateral Consequences” of Punishment

A rich empirical literature documents the consequences of mass incarceration for the wealth, health, and safety of Black Americans. Yet it often frames such consequences as a regrettable artifact of racially disproportionate criminal legal system contact, rather than situating the impetus and functioning of the criminal legal system in the wider context of White political and economic domination. Revisiting a quarter century of mass incarceration research through a stratification economics lens, we highlight how mass incarceration shapes Black–White competition for education, employment, and financial resources and contributes to Black–White disparities in well-being. Highlighting persistent research gaps, we propose a research agenda to better understand how mass incarceration contributes to systematic White advantage. To address mass incarceration's consequences and transform the conditions of White political and economic domination under which it arose, we call for legislative and judicial intervention to remedy White hyper-enfranchisement and reparations to eliminate the Black–White wealth gap.

The Role of Judicial Activism in the Enforcement of Human Rights in Pakistan and its Impacts on Governance in Pakistan

This study examines how judicial activism impacts governance in Pakistan after the lawyer's movement with a focus on its effect on human rights, the rule of law, and accountability. The study uses mixed techniques to examine Supreme Court decisions and interventions that demonstrate the judiciary's role in protecting civil liberties and checking executive powers. Apex Court's activism on extrajudicial killings forced disappearances, and gender discrimination has advanced human rights, according to the findings. The research also shows how the judiciary has strengthened the rule of law by upholding and enforcing legal principles fairly, boosting public faith in legal institutions. The research also notes that alleged judicial overreach has caused problems between the legislative and executive branches due to the courts' wide interpretations of their authority. This detailed analysis highlights the delicate balance between judicial interventions and democratic government.

Planning, Discretion, and Judicial Intervention: Recent Discussions and Institutional Changes in the UK and Role of Court on Planning

In many jurisdictions, the planning authority has considerable discretion at all stages of the interpretation, implementation, and application of urban planning. The courts or judiciaries of many countries take a deferential view of administrative agencies’planning judgments or decisions for reasons such as a lack of expertise in policy judgments on urban planning. However, planning is not free from judicial or statutory review from the perspective of the rule of law, and it is necessary to secure the legitimacy of urban planning and related administrative actions or decisions. Nevertheless, it is not easy to consider the extent to which the courts or judiciary can intervene in urban planning and policy-related issues and what institutional processes can be conceived for that. The relatively recent trends in the UK in the 2010s can be referred to for these issues. First, in terms of the substantial aspect, the UK Supreme Courtin its 2012 Tesco v Dundee ruling ruled that the interpretation of urban planning should be conducted from an objective perspective, considering the appropriate context, and explicitly declared that the interpretation of urban planning or planning policies was also a matter of law. Considering the characteristics of the UK planning law system, which is often represented by discretionary planning permission and the nationalization of development rights, this change in the court’s position has had a considerable impact on the trend of appeals against planning decisions and has prompted subsequent discussions on the scope and legal principles of court intervention in urban planning. Second, in terms of the procedural aspect, the UK introduced the Planning Court under the High Court in 2014, which has shortened the hearing timetable for important planning cases and has specialized planning judges hear them. This attempt is evaluated positively to some extent. Such discussions have not yet been fully introduced outside of the UK, not only in Korea but also in other countries. Hence, this study critically examines these discussions in the UKand derives implications that can be referenced from our perspective and system.

Interpreting Legal Rights: Disparities in Judicial Treatment of Children Born Out of Wedlock in East Java, Indonesia

Interpreting Legal Rights: Disparities in Judicial Treatment of Children Born Out of Wedlock in East Java, Indonesia

The treatment of drug abuse in juvenile offenders: an analysis in the Spanish population

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the variables influencing the efficacy of different approaches to addressing the problem of drug use among juvenile offenders. A longitudinal study was conducted with 79 adolescent internees at the Teresa de Calcuta CEMJ (Centro de Ejecución de Medidas Judiciales) in Madrid. Therapeutic interventions were conducted with adolescents with severe drug-related problems. For data analysis, binary logistic regression analysis was used. Therapeutic success after a three-month follow-up period was 53.2%. The regression analysis correctly classified 86.1% of the cases, effectively predicting 85.7% of therapeutic success and 86.5% of therapeutic failure. The analysis identified 4 predictive factors: the number of criminal charges resulting in internment, number of minor infractions committed during detention, prior consumption of ecstasy and risk factors in personality and/or behavioural issues. The results suggest that judicial and therapeutic interventions should be based on the chronicity of delinquency and other individual personality traits.

Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Penegakan Hukum dan Mempertahankan Keseimbangan Kekuasaan dalam Sistem Pemerintahan Indonesia

This research aims to evaluate the role of the Constitutional Court (MK) in maintaining constitutional supremacy, democracy and balance of power in the Indonesian constitutional system. This research uses a qualitative approach with descriptive methods. Data was collected from primary sources in the form of statutory regulations, such as the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court, as well as secondary sources in the form of books, legal journals and legal scientific articles. The research results show that the Constitutional Court has an important role in maintaining legal stability, maintaining the balance of power between state institutions, and upholding democratic principles and constitutional supremacy in Indonesia. Through its authority to carry out judicial reviews of laws and government policies, the Constitutional Court functions as the front guard in enforcing the law and maintaining the balance of power between the executive, legislative and judiciary. However, the role of the Constitutional Court often sparks debate regarding the limits of judicial intervention in public policy, showing the complexity in maintaining the balance of power. Therefore, this research contributes to understanding the role and challenges faced by the Constitutional Court in the context of the Indonesian constitutional system.

Strengthening India’s Cybersecurity and Data Privacy Landscape: A Comprehensive Overview

This article chronicles India’s cybersecurity and data privacy journey, from the inception of the Information Technology Act in 2000 to the latest Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023. Examining key legislative developments, committee formations and judicial interventions, it highlights India’s commitment to fortifying its cybersecurity framework. The topic is analysed in a substantially analytical and qualitative manner, primarily based on literature, both primary and secondary. It is descriptive and puts forth a case explanation of cyber security in banking. In the face of escalating challenges in the digital era, the article contributes to the discourse by addressing prevalent threats like deep fakes, existing frameworks and innovative strategies for securing digital assets. Emphasising the critical interplay of technology, governance and the legal framework, the article underscores the imperative of robust cybersecurity measures to safeguard citizens’ and government interests.

Medical education in Hindi and indigenous languages in India: Issues and challenges.

In October 2022, the launch of first year MBBS books in Hindi language in the state of Madhya Pradesh in India kick started the debate on the introduction of Hindi/local language in medical education, which is currently being imparted in English. Opinions have been divided among the supporters of Hindi and local languages as well as opponents of this move. However, several issues need to be addressed before wider implementation of the policy of imparting medical education in Hindi/local languages. Right from infrastructure, human resource, economic impact, academic impact, international effects to legal issues have to be kept in mind and stakeholders must discuss these before implementation. A subsequent reversal of this policy, either through executive orders or judicial intervention, could lead to irreparable loss to students enrolled and trained in Hindi/local language.

The Fate of “Essential Religious Practices” in India's Constitutional Courts

It has been nearly seven decades since the Indian Supreme Court laid down the “essential religious practices” test to determine which religious practices are granted constitutional protection against state regulation. This article surveys the forty-three cases in which the essentiality plea has been raised since its formulation in 1954 until August 2022. Although the essentiality plea has a staggeringly high failure rate of 84 percent before India's constitutional courts, judicial decisions show a shift in legal rationale. The article shows that many of these decisions invariably reflected the socioreligious context of their time. An increase in anti-Muslim religious polarization meant that the fate of the essentiality plea differed depending on the religion of litigants. This judicial treatment of cases stands in stark contrast to the cases decided during the initial decades of the Constitution, when the government was avowedly secular.

‘The Food Must Reach the Hungry’: Lessons from Judicial Enforcement of Right to Food in India

Abstract Food security and securing right to food for all is one of the essential mandate for a welfare State especially for achieving aspiring targets of Sustainable Development Goals 2030. Judicialisation of right to food is a substantial way through which right to food can be protected and implemented at domestic level. The Indian experience of right to food adjudication depicts that the Supreme Court has carved out an expansive role for itself through judicial activism to secure the fundamental rights of the citizens. The PUCL case, popularly called as right to food case has set off a cascade of judicial action and made India a model showing how courts can effectively implement socio-economic rights through judicial intervention. This model of adjudicatory leadership by the constitutional courts shows a remedy-oriented approach which have overcome the normative concerns of democratic legitimacy and polycentricity. Courts have strengthened the institutional legitimacy through participatory democracy with citizens and adjudicated multifaceted policy concerns. The author put forth the emergence of ‘triad model’ of adjudication where interaction of courts, local bodies and citizens makes enforcement of the right more practicable. The article concludes that Courts can be a catalyst for transforming public policy implementation by securing basic right to the citizens through innovative remedies.

CONTOURS OF JURISDICTION UNDER INDIAN ARBITRATION ACT

The Arbitration Act, 1940 had no provision which allowed the Arbitral Tribunal to make a decision on its own jurisdiction like Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the Arbitral Tribunal has been granted the power to make a ruling on its own jurisdiction. Section 16 (1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act states that the Arbitral Tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, including ruling on any objection with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. The legislative intent underlying the 1996 Act is to minimise judicial intervention in the arbitral process and nominate the arbitrator without wasting time, leaving all contentious issues to be decided by the arbitral tribunal itself Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act incorporates the principle of "Compétence-Compétence" or "Compétence de la recognized", is a doctrine that empowers an arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction, including ruling on any objection with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. It is closely related to rules regarding the allocation of jurisdictional competence between arbitral tribunals and national Courts and to rules concerning the nature and timing of judicial consideration of challenges to an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction. The doctrine empowers the arbitrators to decide on their own jurisdiction. The ruling passed in SBP & Co. vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. chipped away the importance of the Kompetenze-Kompetenze principle incorporated in Section 16 consequently, the 2015 Amendment inserted Section 11(6A) in order to restrict the powers of the courts to merely examining the existing of an arbitration agreement. The 2019 Amendment omitted Section 11(6A). now after coming of so many decisions regarding this matter the scope and area of jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal has opened many wings of debate and this chapter is an attempt to discuss all these dimensions

SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT: EVALUATING LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND CHALLENGES

Groundwater is an essential resource for agriculture, drinking water, and industrial use, especially in water-scarce regions like India. However, unsustainable extraction, pollution, and a fragmented regulatory framework have resulted in significant groundwater depletion and contamination. This article presents a comprehensive analysis of the legal framework governing groundwater management in India, with a specific focus on its alignment with principles of sustainability and the challenges encountered in achieving Sustainable Development Goal 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation). The paper evaluates national and state-level laws, including the 2017 Model Groundwater Bill, and assesses the effectiveness of institutional mechanisms such as the Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA). The study also explores the role of judicial interventions in shaping groundwater governance and presents policy recommendations aimed at promoting sustainable groundwater use, ensuring equitable access, and protecting groundwater-dependent ecosystems. In doing so, the article emphasizes the need for an integrated approach that combines legal reforms and community-driven initiatives to safeguard groundwater resources for future generations.

THE RULE OF LAW THROUGH JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN SOUTH AFRICA

The South African Courts frequently juggle different roles within the country’s governance. This causes discomfort among some of the role players within the polity as it is seen as judicial encroachment in matters outside the court’s role. In the South African context of separation of powers, the role of each branch of government is not always clearly defined, and now and again, it gains perspective as courts interpret parliamentary legislation and executive policies. The court’s role and limitations often come under scrutiny. This causes conflicts between the respective branches of government regarding the extent of judicial intervention concerning other branches of government, namely the legislature and executive. This article examines the role and limits of judicial intervention in the terrain of other branches of government within the context of separation of powers as envisaged by the South African Constitution. The doctrine of separation of powers entails the establishment of a trilateral government. The envisaged government consists of the legislature, which enacts laws, an executive that recognises and executes the law and an independent judiciary to regulate public power when all else fails. The article attempts to clarify the place and role of the judiciary in upholding the rule of law in a constitutional state such as South Africa amid rampant complaints of judicial overreach.

The Incongruity Between the Medical Termination of Pregnancy in India and United States: A Comparative Study

Abortion is a controversial right in developing countries such as India. Certain nations place limitations on human rights that are declared under the pretext of the "mother's right to health," while others restrict The act is carried out to protect the embryo's right to life. In the struggle to maintain the balance between the rights of the fetus and the rights of pregnant women, judicial intervention is crucial. Just as in India, the personhood of the fetus and abortion are incompatible with women's reproductive autonomy. Despite this, the Indian judiciary is working to change laws to make them more accepting of women who choose to have abortions and more in line with the circumstances of extraordinary instances. The intention is to provide a more comprehensive understanding of abortion laws and policy in India and the United States. This subject has been studied by researchers with an emphasis on women's reproductive rights. It will concentrate on the abortion-related laws made in the USA and India. This research will compare the conditions of women in emerging nations to those of developed nations, specifically the United States. With the aid of existing legislation and knowledge of pertinent modifications made to it, scholars will draw conclusions on women's reproductive rights.