CJI Surya Kant said the rule of law is not a welfare scheme or economic policy but a safeguard against arbitrary exercise of power. Speaking in Stockholm, he highlighted judicial independence, constitutional democracy and judicial review as essential tools to protect individual liberties.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said on Monday that the rule of law, is not a welfare initiative or an economic strategy. Instead, it serves to constrain the exercise of power so that no individual is left exposed to the “whims” of an arbitrary government.
Speaking at the keynote address during the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) conference in Stockholm, Justice Kant addressed a conference themed “Safeguarding the Rule of Law — Experiences from India and Sweden.” He highlighted the importance of the rule of law, along with judicial independence and constitutional democracy, in protecting individual liberties. He further stated that judicial review is not simply a matter of authority, but a constitutional obligation placed upon the courts.
He said,
“The rule of law is neither a welfare scheme nor an economic policy. It does not, by itself, bake bread, create livelihoods or remove poverty. What it does is something more fundamental, though less immediately visible: it disciplines the exercise of power. It ensures that public authority acts through known, stable and general rules; that citizens are treated as equals before the law; and that no person is left vulnerable to the whims of arbitrary government,”
Justice Kant traced the foundations of Indian legal thinking to ancient traditions of “Dharma,” which, he said, existed long before the development of common law. He emphasized that the principles of judicial independence and the rule of law are not mere “post-colonial imports” from the West.
He described India’s constitutional path since independence and explained that the Constitution functions as a structure that safeguards rights while allocating responsibilities among the legislature, executive, and judiciary.
He said the Constitution is a “tessellation of rights guaranteed to its citizens,” assigning distinct roles, duties, obligations, and powers to the three institutions of governance the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary.
He said,
“In the Indian template, the separation of powers is not a system of rigid, hermetically-sealed barriers, but a beautifully-calibrated network of checks and balances designed to prevent the concentration of absolute power. The Supreme Court has consistently intervened when this delicate equilibrium has been threatened,”
The CJI also stressed that constitutional democracy survives not only through constitutional provisions, but through the consistent observance of constitutional norms by institutions.
He said,
“The greatest safeguard lies in an independent judiciary, which must remain a vigilant guardian of constitutional supremacy,”
He said,
“This enduring commitment to independence enables the Indian judiciary to do more than simply resolve disputes or defend constitutional boundaries. It allows our courts to actively shape the democratic imagination of a vast and varied society and function as architects of democratic life itself,”
ALSO READ: Indian Identity Abroad Rooted in Constitution, Not Just Culture: Justice Surya Kant
Justice Kant added that judicial review should not be understood as judicial supremacy, but as a constitutional responsibility aimed at preserving the rule of law when constitutional bodies fail to remain within their defined limits.
He said,
“It would be no exaggeration to claim that this expansive power of review is a cornerstone of India’s constitutional democracy, affirming that legality and constitutionality are fundamental preconditions to the exercise of governmental authority,”
In discussing constitutional development, the CJI referred to the landmark Kesavananda Bharati ruling, which laid down the basic-structure doctrine. He also cited the S R Bommai case, describing it as reinforcing federalism and democratic governance by requiring legislative floor tests before elected governments could be dismissed.
He further outlined the safeguards that protect judicial independence, including the separation of the judiciary from the executive, constitutional protections for judges, and institutional systems that regulate judicial appointments.
Looking at the evolution of constitutional jurisprudence, Justice Kant said the Supreme Court has expanded access to justice through Public Interest Litigation (PIL), allowing even disadvantaged and marginalised citizens to seek constitutional remedies.
He pointed to several major decisions that widened the interpretation of Article 21 to include rights connected to speedy trials, dignity, livelihood, and environmental protection.
The CJI also highlighted the judiciary’s role in shaping environmental law through doctrines such as absolute liability, the public trust principle, and the polluter-pays principle.
He referenced judicial measures that improved electoral transparency, strengthened women’s representation in legal institutions, addressed workplace sexual harassment, and advanced reproductive rights.
Also Read: Supreme Court Justice Surya Kant: Bar and Bench Must Work Together for Justice
While highlighting the judiciary’s forward-looking role in upholding constitutional values, Justice Kant noted that judicial activism must be matched with institutional restraint.
Adding that courts are not meant to act as “a second appellate authority or a super-executive” that overrides policy choices made by an elected government, He said,
“The rule of law is preserved only when the judiciary honours its own institutional boundaries while holding other branches to theirs,”
Rejecting the view that judicial independence and the rule of law are concepts limited to Western thought, the CJI also referred to India’s ancient tradition by narrating the story of King Prahlada. He said India’s constitutional experience demonstrates that constitutional values grounded in a diverse democracy have universal significance.
He said,
“India’s journey reflects a simple truth: constitutional ideas, when anchored in the lived experience of a complex and diverse democracy, carry a universal resonance that speaks directly to the human aspiration for dignity and justice.”
He said in his concluding remarks,
“The true strength of our judiciary lies not simply in its willingness to speak courageously when the constitutional fabric is threatened, but in its profound institutional wisdom to know when deference and restraint are themselves the highest expressions of constitutional fidelity,”
The CJI said,
“The true strength of our judiciary lies not only in speaking courageously when constitutional values are threatened, but also in recognising when restraint itself is the highest expression of constitutional fidelity,”
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE