2016International Journal of Reviews and Research in Social SciencesRequires access

Judicial Activism Vs. Judicial Restraint:Judicial Review

Kamalnath Nayak

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The judiciary has been assigned active role under the constitution. Judicial activism and judicial restraint are facets of that uncourageous creativity and pragmatic wisdom.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The judiciary has been assigned active role under the constitution. Judicial activism and judicial restraint are facets of that uncourageous creativity and pragmatic wisdom.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The judiciary has been assigned active role under the constitution. Judicial activism and judicial restraint are facets of that uncourageous creativity and pragmatic wisdom.

Key concepts: Judicial activism, Political science, Judicial review, Judicial discretion, Judicial independence, Law, Judicial restraint, Judicial opinion

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Judicial Activism Vs. Judicial Restraint:Judicial Review — Research Paper | ScholarLens