Changing Dimensions of rule of law and their application in the Indian Legal System_ An Analysis
Changing Dimensions of Rule of Law and Their Application in the Indian Legal System: An Analysis
I. Introduction: The Concept of Rule of Law
The Rule of Law is a foundational principle of constitutional democracy. Traditionally, it means:
Everyone is subject to the law.
Laws are clear, publicized, stable, and applied evenly.
Legal processes ensure justice, fairness, and protection of rights.
A.V. Dicey, the classical exponent, identified three pillars:
Supremacy of law.
Equality before the law.
Predominance of legal spirit (constitutional conventions and rights arise from judicial decisions).
However, modern jurisprudence has expanded the dimensions of Rule of Law to incorporate:
Substantive justice (beyond mere formal legality).
Protection of fundamental rights.
Ensuring social and economic equity.
Administrative accountability.
Judicial activism to uphold constitutional morality.
II. Changing Dimensions of Rule of Law in India
India’s constitutional democracy has witnessed an evolution in the understanding and application of Rule of Law, moving from:
Formalistic rule of law (mere compliance with law),
To
Substantive Rule of Law, involving social justice, human dignity, and public interest.
This evolution is reflected in judicial pronouncements that emphasize:
Enforcement of fundamental rights.
Judicial review of legislative and executive actions.
Expanding the scope of public interest litigation.
Administrative accountability.
Protection of vulnerable groups.
Incorporation of socio-economic rights.
III. Key Case Laws Demonstrating Changing Dimensions
1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
Issue:
Extent of Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
Holding:
The Supreme Court held the Basic Structure Doctrine, which protects the core of the Constitution, including the Rule of Law.
Significance:
Established that the Rule of Law is part of the basic structure and cannot be abrogated by Parliament.
Reinforces constitutional supremacy and judicial review.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Issue:
Whether procedural due process is required under Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty).
Holding:
The Court expanded the scope of due process, requiring that any law or administrative action affecting personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.
Significance:
Transition from formal legality to substantive fairness, deepening the Rule of Law.
3. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)
Issue:
Right to livelihood under Article 21 for pavement dwellers threatened with eviction.
Holding:
The Court ruled that the right to life includes the right to livelihood and any deprivation must comply with fair procedure.
Significance:
Broadened Rule of Law to protect socio-economic rights, integrating social justice.
4. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)
Issue:
Use of Article 356 (President's Rule) and federal balance.
Holding:
The Supreme Court limited arbitrary dismissal of state governments, reinforcing federalism and constitutional governance.
Significance:
Strengthened Rule of Law against executive overreach, ensuring checks and balances.
5. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
Issue:
Protection against sexual harassment at the workplace.
Holding:
The Court framed guidelines (Vishaka Guidelines) in absence of legislation, enforcing fundamental rights to equality and dignity.
Significance:
Demonstrated judicial activism in promoting Rule of Law as a tool for social transformation.
IV. Analysis: Dimensions Explored Through Cases
| Dimension | Explanation | Case Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Constitutional Supremacy & Judicial Review | Basic Structure doctrine protects rule of law | Kesavananda Bharati |
| Substantive Due Process | Fairness and reasonableness in law and action | Maneka Gandhi |
| Socio-Economic Rights | Right to livelihood as part of right to life | Olga Tellis |
| Federalism and Checks on Executive | Prevents misuse of power in governance | S.R. Bommai |
| Judicial Activism and Social Justice | Courts proactively protect fundamental rights | Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan |
V. Current Challenges and Emerging Trends
Increasing judicial activism balancing democracy and individual rights.
Growing focus on environmental justice (e.g., MC Mehta cases).
Expansion of Rule of Law to include digital rights and privacy (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017).
Continuing tension between executive power and judicial oversight.
The demand for access to justice and simplification of legal procedures.
VI. Conclusion
The Rule of Law in India has undergone a profound transformation from a formal legalistic principle to a dynamic, living concept ensuring:
Protection of fundamental rights.
Enforcement of social justice.
Restraint on arbitrary power.
Accountability of all state organs.
Expansion to new domains like environmental and digital rights.
The judiciary has been the custodian of this evolving Rule of Law, progressively interpreting the Constitution to meet the changing social, political, and economic needs of India.
RELATED Blog
0 comments