PSIR Answer Writing Module 2023
Model Answers
Test 11
For any concern related with PSIR Test Series mail at psirtestseries@shubhraranjan.com
1. Critically examine the relevance of Marx concept of Alienation? Elaborate on Marx
views on Human emancipation?
The Marxian concept of alienation or estrangement is one of the most discussed notions in
the history of modern social and political theory. There is a long history of the term before
Marx but the Marxian formulation is undoubtedly the most influential. While being present
in Capital, and recurring in the Grundrisse, it was explicitly theorised in the Economic and
Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, published posthumously in 1932.
Marx applied the concept of alienation to work in industrial capitalist societies, arguing that
emancipation for workers lay in their wrestling control away from the small, dominating
ruling class.Work in the past may well have been more physically demanding, but Marx
argued that it was also less alienating because workers (craftsmen for example) had more
control over their working conditions, work was more skilled and it was more satisfying,
because workers could ‘see themselves in their work’.
However, in 19th century industrial factories, workers effectively had no control over what
they were doing, their work was unskilled and they were effectively a ‘cog in a machine’,
which generated high levels of alienation – or feelings of powerlessness, helplessness, and of
not being in control.
Marx’s theory suggests capitalist production creates alienation in four main areas:
1. Workers are alienated from their own labour power – they have to work as and
when required and to perform the tasks set by their employers.
2. They are alienated from the products of their labour – which are successfully
claimed by capitalists to be sold as products on the marketplace for profit, while
workers only receive a fraction of this profit as wages
3. Workers are alienated from each other – they are encouraged to compete with each
other for jobs.
4. They are alienated from their own species being – according to Marx, satisfying
work is an essential part of being human, and capitalism makes work a misery, so
work under capitalism thus alienates man from himself. It is no longer a joy, it is
simply a means to earn wages to survive.
Marx’s concept of alienation was very abstract and linked to his general theory of society,
with its revolutionary conclusions, and as such, not especially easy to apply to social
research.
However, in the 20th century some sociologists stripped the concept from its theoretical
origins in order to make the concept more useful for empirical research.
One example is Robert Blauner’s ‘Alienation and Freedom (1964) in which he compared the
alienating effects of working conditions in four industries – focusing on the experience of the
four key aspects of alienation: powerlessness, meaninglessness, isolation and self-
estrangement.
Similarly, the interest in young Marx has lead to the rise of new schools such as Frankfurt
school of Critical theory.The Frankfurt School was a group of scholars known for developing
critical theory and popularizing the dialectical method of learning by interrogating society's
contradictions. It is most closely associated with the work of Max Horkheimer, Theodor W.
Adorno, Erich Fromm, and Herbert Marcuse. One of the core concerns of the scholars of the
Frankfurt School, especially Horkheimer, Adorno, Benjamin, and Marcuse, was the rise of
"mass culture." This phrase refers to the technological developments that allowed for the
distribution of cultural products—music, film, and art—on a mass scale.
During the recent decade, scholars from different social scientific disciplines and of various
political stripes have described contemporary society as characterized by surging social
inequalities, political fatalism and disenfranchisement, social disintegration, and increasing
rates of loneliness, isolation and mental health issues .Among the benefits of Marxist
alienation theory is the potential to explain how these and other issues can be related to the
basic organization of capitalist society.The Marxist theory of alienation may be helpful for
highlighting and examining what may be referred to as the paradox of social power and
isolation. It is collective powerlessness in the face of humanly created ecological,
technological, political, cultural and social change, a social experience that coincides and
even seems to be produced by what is objectively an increase in humanity’s social and
material power.Together, these phenomena reflect what may be described as a breakdown
in the capacity for collective action in contemporary society.
Marx’s well known solution to the ills of alienation was communism – a way of organizing
society in which workers would have much more control over their working conditions, and
thus would experience much less alienation.
2. Compare behavioural approach with post-behavioural approach. Do you think post
behaviouralism is anti-thetical to behaviouralism?
The behavioural movement assumed an important position in the social sciences in the
1950s and 1960s. Its philosophical origins were in the writings of Auguste Comte in the
nineteenth century and in the logical positivism of the ‘Vienna Circle’ in the 1920s.The
behavioural approach to social and political analysis concentrate on a single question: Why
do people behave in the way they do? What differentiates behaviouralists from other social
scientists is their insistence that (1) observable behaviour, whether it is at the level of the
individual or the social aggregate, should be the focus of analysis; and (2) any explanation of
that behaviour should be susceptible to empirical testing. Behavioural scholars take the view
that, whatever theoretical categories any analysis uses, social enquiry is fundamentally
about trying to understand what it is that (some) people do, think or say.To Leslie Lipson,
“The behavioural method records the details of what men do, seeking to explain why they
do...”
Behavioural approach is based on some fundamental assumptions.David Easton has laid
down eight basic characteristics. These are Regularities, Verification, Techniques,
Quantification, Value free, Systematization, Pure Science and Integration.Scholars working in
the behavioural tradition have investigated a wide range of substantive problems.
Behaviouralists have extensively analysed the reasons that underlie the main form of mass
political participation in democratic countries i.e voting.They have also examined the origins
of participation in other, more unconventional, forms of political activity such as
demonstrations, strikes and even riots .At the elite level, behaviouralists have analysed
leadership behaviour, placing particular emphasis on the connections between the way in
which leaders view the world (their attitudes and values) and the particular actions that they
take .At the international level, behavioural analysis has also focused on the actions of
nation states as well as on the behaviour of non-state actors such as multinational
corporations, international terrorist groups and supranational organisations such as the
European Union .
Behaviouralists, then, emphasise the twin notions that theories should: (1) seek to explain
something; and (2) be capable, in principle, of being tested against the world of observation.
But behavioural approaches came with its own limitations.Behavioural Approach advocates
empirical study of individual behaviours. But all aspects of individual behaviour can’t be
observed and stated through empirical generalizations.This approach is based on value-
neutrality, is also not practical. Because, in political science, we study human-behaviour and
it cannot be make a value-neutral discipline at any cost. Later positivists, notably Hempel
and Popper, strongly rejected this ‘narrow inductivist’ view of the nature of scientific enquiry,
arguing that enquiry could only proceed if the researcher’s efforts to observe ‘relevant facts’
were guided either by clear theoretical expectations or, at a minimum, by some kind of
explanatory ‘hunch’.Gabriel A. Almond once put it succinctly in an earlier debate when he
stated that because “science cannot create values,” it does not follow that scientists cannot
investigate values if they wish to do so.
In order to rectify such shortcomings, we see the emergence of post behavioural approach to
political science.Post- Behavioural Approach is both a movement and academic tendency. It
opposed the efforts of the Behavioural Approach to make Political science a value free
science. The Post- Behavioural Approach is a future oriented approach which wants to solve
problems of both present and future.It emerged out of the lecture of David Easton titled
‘Credo of Relevance’ which highlighted the crisis in political science as a discipline and the
dis-satisfaction with behavioralism, which in turn was proposed to reform political
science.David Easton gave a call for ‘creative theory’ (action and relevance) to revive the
discipline, christening it post behavioralism. He suggested that our theories should be
relevant to times and should also lead to action. Technique is important, but can be
compromised for the purpose it serves. It is better to be vague than non-relevant. here are
some basic characteristics of Post- Behavioural Approach. Importance on action and
relevance, human problem oriented, qualitative and qualitative, concerned with regularities
and irregularities are the basic features of Post-Behavioural Approach. David Easton has
mentioned about seven key features of Post- Behavioural Approach to political science.
Therefore, we can say that Post- Behavioural Approach lays emphasis on substance than
technique. It is an attempt to develop a practical, social change oriented approach to
political science. Actually, the Post- Behavioural Approach refines the Behavioural Approach
and tries to make it acceptable. Thus it is not antithetical to behavioral approach , rather the
core of post behaviouralism is still behaviouralism but not without certain qualifications.
3. Explain the concept of democratic equality with reference to Rawls’ theory of justice
Democratic equality is the idea that one requirement of treating persons as equals is that all
citizens ought to be treated as equal citizens. If social and political inequalities
undermine relations of equal citizenship, then such inequalities are unjust according to
democratic equality. For example, democratic equality may require that all citizens enjoy
equal basic liberties and that inequalities of wealth and income be kept within limits. We can
see in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s work an early advocacy of what has come to be called
democratic equality.For example, he thought that no one could be a moral equal of those he
could dominate with his vastly superior economic power. John Stuart Mill also seemed to be
committed to democratic equality, as do contemporary writers like John Rawls and Elizabeth
Anderson.
Democratic equality is the conception of distributive justice that is realized through the joint
implementation of the two constitutive parts of Rawls’s second principle of justice: the
principle of fair equality of opportunity and the difference principle. Rawls designs this
conception to mitigate the influence on life chances of factors that are arbitrary from the
moral point of view – in particular, natural and social endowments. The fair equality of
opportunity principle aims to neutralize the influence of social endowments on life chances,
while the difference principle aims primarily to reduce the influence of natural endowments.
The conception assumes, as a background condition, the satisfaction of Rawls’s first principle
guaranteeing to each person an equal right to a fully adequate scheme of basic liberties .In
addition, the two principles of democratic equality are ranked in lexical order, and fair
equality of opportunity is assigned strict priority over the difference principle.
While the two principles are ranked in lexical order, Rawls emphasizes that the principles
operate as a unit . That is, each principle interacts with and qualifies the character and
proper operation of the other principle. In developing this notion, Rawls seems particularly
concerned to establish that the proper implementation of the second principle of justice
should not establish a meritocracy.
Moreover, Rawls’s account of democratic equality goes beyond providing an account of
justice in distribution and sets out a normative ideal of justice that incorporates an account
of the structure and character of relations that are appropriate for members of society
viewed as free and equal moral beings.
Therefore, Rawls comes up with the two principles of justice as fairness, which will give
institutional form to the guiding idea of justice. He deduces from the original position the
two principles that will serve to manage and evaluate the functioning of the basic
institutions of a just society.
4. Critically evaluate the contemporary relevance of Kautilya’s views on diplomacy and
foreign policy.
According to Deepshikha Shahi in her book” Kautilya and non western IR theory”, the act of
analysing the contemporary relevance of kautilya’s views on diplomacy and foreign policy
serves two purposes namely, of asserting the original thinking of Asian epistemic
communities, and charting the ambitious power-politics of Indian strategic communities and
at the same time adding on the discussions with regard to Eurocentrism.Kautilya’s text
serves as a potent non-Western theoretical and conceptual reservoir to engage with and
thereby to interrogate the Eurocentric realist tradition.
Kautilya is known for his Mandala and Shadguna siddhant.Kautilya has given the Mandal
Siddhant, which is concentric circles showing different mandals., circles. It is based on the
view that neighbours are natural enemies. Since land is the source of material welfare,
neighbours aim to acquire the same piece of land.For example: In the case of India, Pakistan
and China, all aim to acquire the territory of Kashmir by virtue of its abundant resources as
well as its strategic location. Hence there is bound to be war between India-Pakistan and
India-China.
Now as per Kautilya neighbours are natural enemies hence they are to be subdued. To
achieve that aim, Kautilya has given a strategy of SHADGUNYA SIDDHANT (six-fold policy),
which is to be used as per the situation.It includes strategies as follows:Sandhi (treaty),
Vigraha (break a treaty and start a war), Asan(stationing of forces near enemy), Yaan
(mobilisation of troops), Samashraya (joining hand with those having similar aims), and
lastly Dwaidbhava (Dual policy i.e, friendship with one enemy for time and enmity with
other).
In the current emerging geopolitical scenario, the Indo-Pacific region has acquired centrality.
Its importance is due to the shift of the centre of gravity of geopolitics as well as
geoeconomics. Here as well, from the Indian side, we see an application of Shadgunya
Siddhant.
In this region, we are seeing increasing aggression on part of China. Be it in the South China
Sea (claim of 9-Dash line), construction of artificial island, manoeuvre in India Ocean region
etc., India due to its asymmetry in conventional warfare with China, has favoured Kautilyan
approach of Samashraya (joining hand with those having similar aims).Thus we see India
becoming the part of QUAD.
Kautilya proposed SAMA (Conciliation), Dana (gifts), Danda (punishment), and
Bheda(dissension)) as elements of a states policy towards other states. The US had been
using all the elements of Sama, Dana, Danda and Bheda in order to pursue its interest in
international politics.
Similarly in Arthashastra , emphasis has been laid on economic wellbeing as the primary
determinant of foreign policy.This can be amply seen when India is able to source its
requirement of oil and gas despite the Russia-Ukraine war.
There is also an internal dimension to kautilya’s views. Only a strong nation can chart an
independent foreign policy.It can also be understood from the example of China. Deng
Xiaoping’s policy of hiding strength and biding our time attempted to strengthen China
internally till about 2013 when Xi Jinping took over as President. Once it became powerful
internally (economic, social, political, military etc.,) it started showing aggression.
As seen in contemporary times when Institutions of international governance are unable to
deal with rising challenges, nations are resorting to self help.Therefore, the Arthashastra and
its basic tenants would continue to be followed by Nations, as it deals with topics as diverse
as politics, interstate relations, military organisation, war fighting, intelligence, economy,
trade practices, shipping, and even gender relations.
5. Enumerate salient features of cultural Nationalist perspective on Indian National
movement.
Civic nationalism versus cultural nationalism is a discourse that has dominated Indian debate
in recent days.The former subsumes the liberal values of freedom, tolerance, individual
rights and multiculturalism, with constitutional guarantees. Cultural nationalism
encompasses a sense of belonging and anchoring in a specific cultural and civilisational
milieu.
Cultural nationalism is a form of nationalism in which the nation is defined by a shared
culture. It focuses on a national identity shaped by cultural traditionsAccording to cultural
national perspective India as a nation predates the framing of its Constitution. It predates
the freedom struggle. It predates the arrival of all those who eventually made India their
homeland.
The roots of cultural nationalism can be traced to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s Anand math
where he eulogized Bharat Mata.Here, Mother India evolves in three stages — first Lakshmi
and Saraswati “as she was in the past”, second Kali “blackened, shrouded in darkness,
robbed of everything and naked” as mother in the present, and third Durga, the 10-arm all-
powerful and smiling goddess as the mother will be in future. Partha Chatterjee calls this
juncture as the moment of departure in Indian National movement.
Jawahar lal Nehru in his book ‘ Discovery of India’ mentions that Bharat Mata represents
people of India. Similarly, Aurobindo Ghosh who is known as the prophet of Indian
nationalism gave a bold theory of Indian Nationalism .He held that nationalism is a spiritual
concept.The bedrock of political philosophy of Aurobindo was his concept of spiritual
nationalism and the divinity of the motherland.In 1908 he said in a public meeting in
Bombay, "Nationalism is not a mere political programme; Nationalism is a religion that has
come from God;\ Nationalism is a creed which you shall have to live….. If you are going to be
nationalist, if you are going to assent to this religion of nationalism, you must do it in the
religious spirit. You must remember that you are the instrument of God". He elevated the
demand for national freedom to a religious faith so that the masses could be awakened.
Radha Kumud Mookerji, in his Fundamental Unity of India (1914) and many other works,
most famously put forward the idea that India had been great and unified since ancient
times. According to him, there had existed a sense of geographical unity of India since early
times, and even the idea of nationalism was already present in early India.
Renowned Anthropologist Margaret Mead was studying the ‘national character’ of the
Americans and the English when she came to the conclusion that cultural values plays a
significant role in the integration of people belonging to a particular nation .Hence, one
could say that every nation has certain specific cultural tactics that differ from the other. To
quote Jelena Petkovic, “cultural theories adopt the stand that a nation is formed through
cultural continuity and thus the issue of national identity is almost inseparable from the issue
of cultural identity of a people”
6. Trace the evolution of Human Rights movement in India.
Human Rights are generally understood as rights available to individuals on account of
being human beings. Human rights are also often referred to as 'moral rights' as opposed to
'legal rights' i.e. these are rights that should be made equally available to all irrespective of
race, caste, community, region or country that an individual may belong to. They are
therefore said to be universal apart from also being regarded as inalienable and absolute.
In modern times, the genesis of the human rights movement in India may be traced to the
colonial period.Satyamurthy's book titled 'Rights of Citizens' ,traces the origin of human
rights movement in India to soccial reforms movements lead by the likes of Raja ram mohan
Roy and Ishwar chandra Vidyasagar.The social reformers in Bengal received immense
support and help from a number of western social reformers and educationists such as David
Hare, Sister Nivedita and Darezio, as also certain humanist British officials like Governor-
General Lord William Bentick in getting their efforts eventually bearing fruit.
The human rights movement during the phase of nationalist struggle appears to have taken
shape only during the decade of 1930s. The biggest impetus in this direction came in the
form of the Congress adopting a comprehensive resolution on the theme of ‘Fundamental
Rights and duties and Economic and social Change’ in 1931 at its Karachi session.However,
the institutional beginning in this regard is arguably made by the setting up of the Indian
Civil Liberties Union (ICLU) in 1934 at the behest of mainly Nehru to ensure legal assistance
to those freedom fighters who remained undefended while facing trial under the charges of
treason.
However,the entire discourse of human rights during the freedom struggle boiled down to
only the civil and political rights, as in the case of the western countries, to the
marginalization, if not total exclusion, of the social and economic rights of the people which
might have gone to create a more socially egalitarian and economically equitable order in
the post independent times.
As the final product, the Constitution of India incorporates a number of valuable provisions
having profound implications for the human rights movement in the country. The three
important sections where direct or indirect references have been made with regard to the
rights of the people are the Preamble, the Fundamental rights and the Directive Principles of
State Policy (DPSP). Despite having elaborate provisions on political and civil rights of the
people, the operationalization of such provisions started exposing the inherent structural as
well as concomitant functional deformities of the human rights from the very beginning.
Consequently, the groups such as Association for the Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR)
and Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC) were set up in 1972 and 1974
respectively, though in course of time, their functional domain remained confined to
identification, investigation, documentation and in certain cases campaign against cases of
the violations of human rights.We also see the setting up of the People's Union for Civil
Liberties (PUCL) by JayaprakashNarayan in August 1976. Another civil society initiative was
People’s union for democratic rights(PUDR).
Liberalization has led to what Upendra Baxi calls emergence of' human rights markets' .It
became more elite in the post LPG reforms time. But Upendra Baxi is also hopeful and says
that the sphere of human rights is widening; he calls it “new rights arise from the womb of
the old”.The right to privacy judgement is such an example of expanding horizon of human
rights movement in India.
7. Analyse the changing trends in the functioning of Centre-State relations in recent years.
According to Lousie Tillin India’s form of federalism is best seen as an original rather than a
derivative or diminished form.From the start there has been a debate around center-state
relations.The federalism is India has been called quasi, assymetrical,cooperative,competitive
and very recently combative.
Indeed, since Independence, multiple State-Centre and State-State conflicts have roiled the
nation. Centre-State disputes have ranged from those centered on purely fiscal issues— such
as the distribution of funds and the allocation of resources, to those about political
autonomy— such as those over the role of the Governor, or those relating to a wish for
regional identity to not be subsumed under Central command — such as the linguistic
rebellions of the Southern States.
Federal relations had in fact improved over the years. The Union government, for example,
conceded the demand for a linguistic reorganisation of States in the 1950s when the
demands became hard to ignore. Similarly, in the 1960s, it agreed to postpone the
declaration of Hindi as the sole official language until there was consensus among all States.
Rather than weakening, such moves actually strengthened the Union. On the contrary,
efforts to centralise power by the Union government in the 1970s and 1980s generated
centrifugal pressures across several regions. The series of Centre-State conflicts that
followed were resolved not through more centralisation but through recognition of the rights
and demands of regions. The emergence of coalition governments since 1989 played an
important role in this. Contrary to popular perceptions that they cannot be decisive, coalition
governments were in fact responsible for landmark decisions that have defined the
trajectory of Indian development. The government headed by Mr. V.P Singh not only
implemented the recommendations of the Mandal Commission to initiate affirmative action
policies for Backward Classes but also established the Inter-State Council as a constitutional
body to address inter-State conflicts based on federal principles. Subsequent coalition
governments oversaw the implementation of major economic reforms in the 1990s apart
from passing the Right to Employment, the Right to Information, the Right to Education and
the Right to Food Acts that opened up spaces for democratisation and social inclusion.
The three decades preceding 2014 had witnessed a weakening of the Centre by global
treaties and coalition politics in India. Regional parties and the civil society had gained a
bigger say in governance. The decisive victory of the BJP in 2014 under Mr. Modi brought the
curtains down on that. The re-election of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in 2019 with an
even bigger majority than what it had in 2014 signifies the emergence of a dominant
political hegemon in India after a long time. The BJP’s growth has also come at the expense
of non-Congress parties in a large number of states. This is best seen in the squeeze in vote
share of non-BJP non-Congress parties in the 2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
While the signs of political centralisation at the national level are unmistakable, we are also
witnessing a discernible resistance towards similar centralisation at the level of the states.
In important assembly elections, both before and after the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, the BJP’s
performance has been much worse compared to how it has performed in the Lok Sabha
elections. It has won back states in Lok Sabha polls it lost in previous assembly elections and
vice versa.It signifies a remarkable degree of differentiation by voters — between national
and local polls.
To be sure, the present period is very different from the 1970s in terms of economic relations
between the Centre and the states. With the liberalisation of the Indian economy in 1991,
state governments have significantly more freedom in terms of economic policies. Most state
controls on capital have been removed unlike the pre-reform period when the Centre had the
final say in granting industry licences.
In fact, state governments now actively compete with each other to attract capital in various
ways. This competition has also percolated in terms of attracting voters through populist
polices such as farm loan waivers. Yet, this freedom is not absolute as state governments are
more dependent on the Centre for their revenue receipts than ever.
If GST receipts do not live up to their expectations after the expiry of the five-year period
until when the Centre is committed to compensating states, India’s fiscal federalism could
enter a tumultuous phase. It is no wonder that the Fifteenth Finance Commission, the
constitutional body for sharing of resources between the Centre and the states has had to
postpone the submission of its report last year.
Inter-state differences have changed significantly in the past few decades, the most
prominent among them being population. While southern states such as Tamil Nadu and
Kerala have seen a sharp decline in population growth, this has not been the case in the
northern and eastern region. At least two imminent changes in India’s federal arrangement
— the use of 2011 population in deciding the awards of the 15th Finance Commission and
possible delimitation and reassignment of Lok Sabha seats in 2026 — means that the
demographic divergence could end up penalising the southern states, which will have to see
a decline in their revenue share as well as political say in the Parliament.
Thus evolution of federalism in India is best understood as a continuous yet changing process
in the entire realm of the political economy rather than just one event. Another factor which
will add to this tension in the days to come is the growing demographic divide between
Indian states.
8. Differentiate Judicial activism from Judicial overreach. What reforms would u suggest
with respect to functioning of higher judiciary in India?
Judicial Activism, though generally elusive of a universally accepted definition is simply put, a
phenomenon where the judges of higher judiciary refuse to follow the traditional doctrinaire
notions of judicial work being limited to finding of law which is made elsewhere. It is a direct
opposite of the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy of traditional English
jurisprudence.Exercising the power of judicial review, the constitutional courts can strike
down legislative and executive activity. In Indian case, judicial activism also speaks the
language of promoting social justice. Activist judiciary sets itself apart from the role of
passive arbiter which the common law theoretical model would like it to be confined to, and
enthusiastically participates in promotion of human rights i.e.in promotion of particular
goals. P.N. Bhagawati, a pioneer of Indian judicial activism, who prefers the use of the term
‘social activism’ in context of India, defines it as activism which is directed at achieving social
justice.
One such example is the Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which is seen as a relaxation on the
traditional rule of locus standi. Judicial activism has primarily arisen due to the failure of the
executive and legislatures to act. As a result of that, judicial activism is triggered when the
courts become activists and compel the relevant authority to act. This has led lawmaking in
India to assume new dimensions. Similarly Vishaka vs State of Rajasthan (1997) is an
important case that reminds the need of Judicial activism. Here, the SC laid down guidelines
that ought to be followed in all workplaces to ensure proper treatment of women. It further
stated that these guidelines should be treated as a law until Parliament makes a legislation
for enforcement of gender equality.
Judicial activism is the use of judicial power to articulate and enforce what is beneficial for
society whereas judicial overreach is when the judiciary starts interfering with the proper
functioning of the legislative and executive, thereby encroaching upon the legislature and
executive’s domains.
Glaring instances of judicial overreach include the ban on Deepavali firecrackers citing rising
pollution and safeguarding the environment; banning use of private vehicles after 10 or 15
years; monitoring police investigations; denying the executive any role in the appointment of
judges by instituting a collegium which is said to be an extra-constitutional body;
invalidating the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act; ban of liquor sale at retail
outlets that are within 500 meters of any National or State highway; cancellation of telecom
licenses in 2G case; judicial legislation in Vishakha’s case regarding the prevention of sexual
harassment of women in the workplace; the Supreme Court of India’s setting up of the Lodha
Panel to probe the allegations of corruption and match-fixing in cricket; and betting scandals
in Indian cricket seen as interference not warranting the involvement of the apex court;
interference in the educational policies of the government; sealing of unauthorised
commercial operations in Delhi, to cite a few.
Judicial overreach challenges the doctrine of separation of powers, which should be
considered a basic structure of our constitution. The task of the courts should be to act in a
way that compels the authorities to act and to pass executive orders rather than substitute
judicial orders for administrative ones.
Some suggested reforms:
-Need for speedy delivery of justice and unburdening higher courts.
-More judges, streamlining procedures using information technology and increase the judge-
population ratio to reduce delays and cut costs.
-Reforming the collegium system and bringing about transparency and accountability.
-NITI Aayog in 2018 Strategy Paper (New India @75) had noted that at the current rate of
disposal of cases, it will take more than 324 years to clear the backlog. The COVID-19
Pandemic has only made it worse.The e-Committee of the Supreme Court has been in
existence since 2005.It has made some outstanding recommendations which are not being
followed:
■ Computer algorithms should decide on case listing, case allocation and
adjournments with only a 5% override given to judges.
■ All rational reasons and limits should be put on adjournments;
■ Case listing should give main weightage to ‘first in, first out’; and
■ Case allocation should take into account logical criteria.
This would be a big step in reducing arbitrariness and the unfair advantage that the
powerful enjoy.
