Constitutional Morality And Judicial Activism: Whether Compatible Or Conflicting?
- IJLLR Journal
- 6 hours ago
- 1 min read
Riya Das, LLM, National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam (NLUJAA)
ABSTRACT
This paper explores the evolving relationship between constitutional morality and judicial activism in India’s constitutional framework. With the judiciary playing an increasingly proactive role in the protection and interpretation of fundamental rights, the concept of constitutional morality has emerged as a powerful judicial tool. Originally introduced by ‘Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’ during the Constituent Assembly Debates, constitutional morality represents adherence to the core values and ideals enshrined in the Constitution, beyond its literal text. This paper seeks to critically assess whether the invocation of constitutional morality by an activist judiciary aligns with democratic principles, or whether it undermines the doctrine of separation of powers. It argues while constitutional & judicial activism are not inherently conflicting, their convergence must be grounded in constitutional text, precedent, and democratic legitimacy. By analysing jurisprudence, scholarly opinions, and the normative role of courts in a constitutional democracy, this research aims to propose a balanced framework where constitutional morality serves as a guide—not a substitute—for sound legal reasoning. Ultimately, the paper advocates for a restrained yet responsive judiciary that respects institutional boundaries while promoting justice and equality through constitutional ideals.
Keywords: Judicial Activism, Constitutional Morality, Transformative Constitutionalism, Fundamental Rights
