What are the long-term effects of a Supreme Court advisory opinion on government policy-making?
The Supreme Court has given an advisory opinion, and I am curious about how such opinions shape the formulation and implementation of public policies over time, especially in cases where the government is not legally bound to follow them.
A Supreme Court advisory opinion is given under Article 143 of the Indian Constitution, where the President seeks the Court’s advice on a matter of public importance. Although these opinions are not legally binding, they have significant long-term effects on government policy-making.
- Guidance for Policy Formulation: Advisory opinions clarify constitutional provisions or legal questions, helping the government frame policies that are constitutionally sound and less prone to legal challenges.
- Precedent Value: Even though not binding, these opinions are respected by future governments and courts, influencing subsequent interpretations of law and policy directions.
- Reduction in Litigation: By providing clarity on complex issues, advisory opinions can reduce the chances of future disputes and litigation, leading to smoother policy implementation.
- Checks and Balances: Advisory opinions reinforce the principle of checks and balances, as the judiciary provides its perspective on executive actions, promoting accountability and transparency in governance.
- Public Confidence: When policies are shaped in accordance with the Supreme Court’s advice, it enhances public trust in the government’s decisions and the legal system.
- Influence on Legislative Action: Parliament may use the Supreme Court’s advisory opinion as a reference point while drafting or amending laws, ensuring consistency with constitutional values.
- Development of Constitutional Law: Advisory opinions contribute to the evolution of constitutional jurisprudence, filling gaps in the law and guiding future judicial and executive actions.
Answered
5 hours ago