Supreme Court of India with reference to the doctrine of Separation of Powers
Below is a MRR and PLR article in category Business -> subcategory Other.
Supreme Court of India and the Doctrine of Separation of Powers
Overview
The Indian Supreme Court has affirmed that the Indian Constitution embraces the doctrine of Separation of Powers familiar in Western Constitutionalism. The Constitution’s VII Schedule clearly delineates legislative responsibilities between the Union and State Governments, with Entry 22 in the Concurrent List specifically addressing labor relations.
Judicial Overreach?
The Constitution assigns specific responsibilities to various organs; therefore, can the Supreme Court overstep these boundaries? Recently, the Supreme Court’s view that employees do not have a moral or equitable right to strike has been criticized as judicial overreach and equated to judicial legislation?"something ideally left to legislative bodies.
International Context
Internationally, agreements like the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights emphasize workers' right to strike, as stated in Article 8(1)(d). Although lawful restrictions can apply to armed forces and police, Article 8(3) does not endorse legislative measures that suppress workers' rights. Despite this, the judiciary has seemingly curtailed these rights, overstepping its adjudicative role.
The Supreme Court's Role
The Union Government holds authority over international relations, as indicated by entries 12, 13, and 14 of the Union List in the VII Schedule. Thus, some argue that the Supreme Court’s ruling undermines these international obligations, acting beyond its jurisdiction.
Collective Bargaining Rights
Various conventions affirm the right of workers to engage in collective bargaining and strike. The Committee on Freedom of Association under the International Labour Organization (ILO) considers strikes as legitimate measures to advance workers’ interests. It acknowledges that while restrictions may apply, they should not entirely prohibit strikes, especially when addressing social and economic policies.
The Committee also highlighted the detrimental impact of legislation that replaces striking employees. It concluded that while the right to strike is not absolute, any restrictions should be applied only in exceptional cases or to specific public sector roles, provided these employees receive compensatory guarantees.
In summary, the debate around the Supreme Court's stance on labor rights?"especially the right to strike?"raises essential questions about the nuances of Separation of Powers and highlights the tension between judicial interpretations and legislative prerogatives.
You can find the original non-AI version of this article here: Supreme Court of India with reference to the doctrine of Separation of Powers.
You can browse and read all the articles for free. If you want to use them and get PLR and MRR rights, you need to buy the pack. Learn more about this pack of over 100 000 MRR and PLR articles.