POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF JUDICIAL ACTIVISM

Abstract

Judicial activism refers to the practice where judges interpret the law in a way that promotes social or political change, often exceeding their role of applying existing legislation and adopting an expansive approach to interpreting norms. While it may result in significant advancements, such as ensuring fundamental rights, it also poses risks. Some negative aspects of judicial activism include the violation of the separation of powers when the judiciary assumes competencies of the legislative or executive branches, compromising the system of checks and balances. Furthermore, there is a lack of democratic legitimacy, as unelected judges make decisions that impact the entire society. Excessive judicialization of political and social issues, combined with the creation of legal uncertainties, undermines the predictability of decisions and legal security, destabilizing democratic balance.