GS Question

Convergence:

1. Influence of Common Law: Both India and the UK have a common law legal system, which is rooted in case-law and precedents. This similarity in legal foundations ensures some level of convergence in their judicial practices.

2. Judicial Activism: Both countries have seen an increasing trend of judicial activism, where the courts play an active role in safeguarding fundamental rights and ensuring accountability of the government. This convergence is evident in cases related to public interest litigation, environmental protection, and social justice.

3. Adoption of International Jurisprudence: Both India and the UK have recognized the significance of international law and jurisprudence. They often refer to international conventions, treaties, and judgments while deciding cases, showcasing convergence in their approach toward global legal principles.

Divergence:

1. Judicial Appointment System: In the UK, judges are mainly appointed by the Judicial Appointments Commission, whereas, in India, the process involves a collegium system where senior judges of the Supreme Court select and recommend candidates to the President. This difference showcases a divergence in their judicial appointment processes.

2. Death Penalty: The UK abolished the death penalty in 1965, while India retains it for certain offenses. This divergence highlights contrasting viewpoints on the use of capital punishment and reflects different approaches toward addressing serious crimes.

3. Legal Precedence: In India, the concept of legal precedent differs slightly from the UK. The UK follows a strict hierarchical system where lower courts must strictly follow the decisions of higher courts, creating a binding precedent. In contrast, Indian courts give more weight to the concept of persuasive precedent, allowing judges to interpret the law based on their discretion, resulting in a divergence in the application of legal precedents.

4. Case Backlog: India faces significant challenges with a huge backlog of cases, which often leads to delays in justice delivery. In contrast, the UK has a relatively smaller backlog, ensuring a swifter resolution of cases. This difference highlights the need for reforms and showcases a divergence in their judicial efficiency.

In conclusion, while the judicial systems in India and the UK are rooted in common law and exhibit convergence in areas such as common legal foundations and judicial activism, they also showcase divergence in aspects like the judicial appointment system, stance on the death penalty, interpretation of legal precedence, and case backlog.