Last Updated on June 23, 2022 by
Written by Neena Nagare
Supreme Court Judge, Justice DY Chandrachud on Monday while speaking at the Law Society of England and Wales on the subject of Human Rights In Regulatory Regimes: The Evolution Of Judicial Review, said, “Our committee aims to digitise the Indian judiciary in order to render justice accessible and effective. The third phase of our project seeks to aid the “ease-of-doing business” by tackling judicial pendency and enabling convenience in accessing the judiciary.” While discussing India’s gradual transition from a socialist welfare state to a market driven economy, the apex court judge also shared light on the need to re-evaluate the deep-rooted constitutional commitments. “In embracing these changes, the constitutional order must alert itself to the social and economic deprivation that could be caused by a purely unregulated approach to the law and life,” he said. The Judge elucidated that the Indian Constitution did not embrace an economic policy but rather limited itself to identifying a certain model recapitulated as the Directive Principles of the State Policy. Thus establishing that the economic policy should be a result of the democratic politics of time and not set in stone forever. He ventured that while discussing social welfare, the economic policy of the state is often neglected. “There is an undeniable link between the freedom and liberty that is enjoyed by every individual and the broader economic philosophy of a state.” Regarding his own experience with interpreting the Constitution in vexed out commercial cases, he said, “These issues are not just contractual disputes between private parties, but conflicts between regulatory agencies and defendants which have wide-ranging implications on the economy. These disputes are not divorced from interpreting the Constitution, but are rather emblematic of it.” He believes that the economic structure in the state is always connected with the rights and liberties of the citizens. “My experiences with adjudication have led me to believe that a sustained interrogation of the seemingly “private” spheres of law provides impetus to a more robust conception of rights and liberties in all spheres.” And lastly on finding a healthy balance between private economic interests and regulation, he observed, “As a judge, I witness the tensions between private entrepreneurship and the state’s regulatory powers on a daily basis. In crafting my judicial opinions, I am conscious of how these seemingly benign interpretational issues determine economic coordination and investment patterns.”
