Q1. Which concept is directly related to judicial activism in India?
- Judicial Review
- Judicial Restraint
- Separation of Powers
- Writ Jurisdiction
Correct Option: 1. Judicial Review.
Explanation: Judicial activism is inherently tied to judicial review, which allows the judiciary to examine and declare laws and actions that violate the constitution as void. Judicial activism, however, goes beyond judicial review by involving judges in lawmaking and policy preferences.
Q2. What did the Supreme Court of India emphasize in its December 2007 ruling regarding judicial activism?
- Judges should take over legislative functions when necessary
- Judicial activism is necessary for maintaining democratic values
- Judges should not encroach on the functions of the legislature or the executive
- The judiciary should intervene in every case involving public policy
Correct Option: 3. Judges should not encroach on the functions of the legislature or the executive.
Explanation: In its December 2007 ruling, the Supreme Court of India warned against judicial overreach and emphasized that judges should not assume legislative or executive functions. The Court stressed the importance of respecting the separation of powers and avoiding encroachment on other branches of government.
Q3. Which of the following is a fear of judicial activism discussed by Upendra Baxi?
- Fear of judicial accountability
- Legitimation fears
- Fear of empowering the legislature
- Fear of ignoring social issues
Correct Option: 2. Legitimation fears
Explanation: One of the fears associated with judicial activism is legitimation fears, where courts worry about their decisions losing authority if they are bypassed or ignored by the executive or legislature. This can lead to a depletion of the judiciary’s symbolic and instrumental power.
Q4. Which of the following groups is most likely to activate judicial activism in India?
- Bar Associations
- Civil Rights Activists
- Environmental Protection Agencies
- Women’s Rights Groups
Correct Option: 2. Civil Rights Activists
Explanation: Civil rights activists are one of the key groups that activate judicial activism, as they often bring cases before the judiciary to protect civil and political rights, especially when the legislature and executive fail to address societal injustices.
Q5. What is the primary difference between judicial activism and judicial review?
- Judicial activism focuses on upholding existing laws, while judicial review focuses on creating new laws
- Judicial activism involves the judiciary creating new legal precedents, while judicial review only validates or invalidates laws
- Judicial review involves legislative intervention, while judicial activism does not
- Judicial activism is about respecting judicial precedent, while judicial review is about policy-making
Correct Option: 2. Judicial activism involves the judiciary creating new legal precedents, while judicial review only validates or invalidates laws
Explanation: The key difference between judicial activism and judicial review is that judicial activism goes beyond simply validating or invalidating laws—it involves the judiciary creating new legal precedents, engaging in social engineering, and occasionally entering into policy-making. Judicial review, on the other hand, is limited to the courts assessing whether laws and actions are in accordance with the constitution.