Public Interest Litigation

Motivated Public Interest Litigation (PIL) poses a grave danger to the credibility of the judicial process.

The Delhi High Court warned against frivolous PILs, saying that courts must carefully evaluate whether people who approach them with PILs are genuine or acting for personal or political advantage.
PILs that are motivated endanger the credibility of the court process.
Furthermore, they have a history of jeopardising the integrity of other institutions and undermining public trust in democracy and the rule of law.

About
- The use of the law to promote human rights and equality.
- As well as to raise issues of general public concern, it is known as public interest litigation (PIL).
- It helps underprivileged and marginalised minorities speak up in defence of their fundamental human rights.
- The primary purpose of PILs is to protect the fundamental rights of those who cannot represent themselves in court.
- In most circumstances, the person or entity who has been injured seeks justice in the courts.
- But, in PIL, anybody can file a complaint or an appeal on behalf of the victims.
- A PIL enables a socially conscious citizen or a public-spirited non-governmental organisation to pursue a public cause by seeking judicial redress of a public injury.
- It is not defined by legislation or statute.
- It was founded in India by the court in the 1970s and 1980s when it opted to address concerns about human rights breaches.

PIL aims to provide ordinary people access to the courts to get legal redress.
PIL is a crucial tool for social transformation, preserving the rule of law and speeding the balance of law and justice.
The initial goal of PILs was to make justice available to the poor and marginalised.
It is a crucial tool for bringing human rights to those denied them.
It equalises access to justice for all.
It aids in the judicial oversight of governmental institutions such as prisons, asylums, and protective homes.
It is an important tool for putting judicial review into action.
Introducing PILs ensures increased public engagement in the judicial review of administrative action.

Violation of the basic human rights of the poor.
Content and conduct of the government and its policymaking.
Labour exploitation issues.
Women rights.
Caste and religious issues.
Governance issues and the working of public bodies: Local, state, and the union.
Environmental issues.
The issues of culture and heritage.
Other matters of public importance.

The courts have done little to prevent the filing of bogus PILs.
- This adds to the already overburdened court system.
- The number of fake PILs that are still pending in court has an impact on the status of socioeconomically meaningful PILs.
A key issue is that PIL cases merely provide symbolic justice.
- There are two ways to interpret symbology.
- Firstly, as the Vishakha recommendations indicated, passing legislation takes too long, rendering court orders ineffective.
- Secondly, DPSPs are converted to FRs when the state cannot enforce them.
- Fundamental rights are compromised when established rights cannot be enforced.
While purporting to serve the public interest, PILs have been abused for personal gain.
- PILs filed in secret in the name of the public interest have forced the suspension of several commendable efforts.
This has been used to establish a framework for competing rights.
- When a court orders the closure of a polluting enterprise, for example, the interests of the workers and their families who lose their source of income may be overlooked.
The practice of public interest litigation (PIL) usually results in judicial overreach.
- As a result, the judiciary becomes a game changer.

Public Interest Litigation has yielded astounding achievements that would have been impossible three decades ago.
With judicial intervention, degraded bonded labourers, tortured under trials and women prisoners, humiliated inmates of protected women’s homes, blinded convicts, exploited children, beggars, and many more have received redress.
The most significant achievement of PIL has been to increase government accountability for poor people’s human rights.
The PIL establishes a new jurisprudence of the state’s accountability for constitutional and legal infractions that harm the interests of the community’s weakest members.
Nonetheless, the Judiciary should use PILs cautiously to avoid Judicial Overreach violating the Separation of Power principle.
Furthermore, frivolous PILs with vested interests must be avoided to manageable the burden.

Pic Courtesy: iPleaders

Content Source: The Hindu