Public interest litigation, or PIL, is defined as the use of litigation, or legal action, which seeks to advance the cause of minority or disadvantaged groups or individuals, or which raises issues of broad public concern. It is a way of using the law strategically to effect social change.
The main objective of PILs is to protect the fundamental rights of people who themselves cannot approach the court.
PIL can be used to:-
- Provide access to justice
- Reform the law
- Hold government to account
- End denials of justice
- Address corruption
- Empower the disadvantaged, etc.
Why every PI matter cannot become PIL
- The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article 32 is not a panacea for all ills but a remedy for violation of fundamental rights.
- The phrase ‘public interest’ is completely open-ended. It is too wide that it contains every aspect of civilian’s lives.
- No activity of the State and its instrumentalities is seemingly exempted from being a subject matter of PIL to the extent public interest/fundamental rights is/are at stake.
- Supreme Court has emphasized that judicial process provides remedies for constitutional or legal infractions only and that on issues of governance and every other good that the society aspires to achieve cannot be achieved through the instrumentality of Courts.
- Motive behind PIL is providing a tool in hands of public spirited citizens who have a good motive behind filing the PIL and it should be prevented from becoming a weapon of litigants who want either commercial gain or publicity.
- As the constitution has put certain limits on judicial reach, Courts, while dealing with PILs must be aware of the increasing thinning line between justice delivery and possible encroachment on executive and legislative domains.
- Policy making and implementation of policy are conventionally regarded as the exclusive domain of the executive and the legislature. The power of judicial review cannot be used by the court to usurp or abdicate the powers of other organs.
Private misuse
- The abuse of PIL has become quite rampant and genuine causes have either receded to the background or begun to be viewed with the suspicion because of certain spurious causes mooted by privately motivated interests.
- In the absence of any framework of PILs, approach to PILs is a measure, dimension and reflection of the value system of the chief justice or presiding judge.
- The only criterion for accepting a PIL has been receptivity and sympathy of the presiding judge, hence it has left much scope for acceptance of PILs with vested private interests.
- Many of the PIL activists in the country have found the PIL as a handy tool of harassment since frivolous cases could be filed without investment of heavy court fees as required in private civil litigation.
- PIL as a judicial recourse leaves enough room for its abuse and indiscriminate filing to serve vested interests or gain easy publicity.
- PILs have been used to target political rivals, hassle public authorities and settle personal scores.
