From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The counter-majoritarian difficulty (sometimes counter-majoritarian dilemma) is a perceived problem with judicial review of legislative (or popularly-created) laws.
What is meant by judicial independence?
Judicial independence,
the ability of courts and judges to perform their duties free of influence or control by other actors
, whether governmental or private. The term is also used in a normative sense to refer to the kind of independence that courts and judges ought to possess.
What is the counter majoritarian dilemma South Africa?
All of us learnt as law students about the so-called “counter majoritarian” dilemma –
where unelected judges use the power of judicial review to nullify the actions of elected public representatives in the executive or the legislature.
What is the meaning of the judicial review?
Judicial review is the idea, fundamental to the US system of government, that
the actions of the executive and legislative branches of government are subject to review and possible invalidation by the judiciary
.
What do you understand by judicial activism?
Judicial activism is
the exercise of the power of judicial review to set aside government acts
. Generally, the phrase is used to identify undesirable exercises of that power, but there is little agreement on which instances are undesirable.
What is the rule of law in South Africa?
The Rule of Law, in its most basic form, is
the principle that no person is above the law
. The rule follows from the idea that truth, and therefore law, is based upon fundamental principles which can be discovered, but which cannot be created through an act of will.
What does Section 36 of the Constitution say?
In terms of section 36(1) of the Constitution, the general requirements for the limitation of any right is that
it may be limited only in terms of law of general application “to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom”
.
What are the two ideals of judicial independence?
Second, our courts have interpreted the concept of independence as it pertains to the judiciary as comprising two ideals: namely,
impartiality and freedom from external (political and financial pressures) interference
.
What are the reasons for judicial independence?
Judicial independence serves
as a safeguard for the rights and privileges provided by a limited constitution and prevents executive and legislative encroachment upon those rights
. It serves as a foundation for the rule of law and democracy.
What is judicial independence and why is it important?
Judicial independence is important to you because it
guarantees that judges are free to decide honestly and impartially
, in accordance with the law and evidence, without concern or fear of interference, control, or improper influence from anyone.
What is judicial review can you explain it in your own words?
judicial review, power of the courts of a country to examine the actions of the legislative, executive, and administrative arms of the government and to determine whether such actions are consistent with the constitution.
Actions judged inconsistent are declared unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void
.
What are the 3 principles of judicial review?
The three principles of judicial review are as follows:
The Constitution is the supreme law of the country. The Supreme Court has the ultimate authority in ruling on constitutional matters
. The judiciary must rule against any law that conflicts with the Constitution.
What is the Article 137?
Article 137 of the Constitution of India, 1950, provides that subject to provisions of any law and rules made under Article 145,
the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it
. … The word “Review” in legal parlance connotes a judicial re-examination of the case.
What court case is an example of judicial activism?
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
is one of the most popular examples of judicial activism to come out of the Warren Court. Warren delivered the majority opinion, which found that segregated schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
How is judicial activism good?
Judicial activism is
highly effective for bringing forth social reforms
. Unlike the legislature, the judiciary is more exposed to the problems in society through the cases it hears. So it can take just decisions to address such problems.
Is judicial restraint good?
Judicial restraint is considered desirable
because it allows the people, through their elected representatives, to make policy choices.
