In a speech laced with both pride and warning, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai stood before the storied halls of the Oxford Union and drew a sharp line in the sand: judicial activism, he declared, must never mutate into judicial terrorism.
Delivering a keynote address titled ‘From Representation to Realization: Embodying the Constitution’s Promise’, the Chief Justice traced India’s judicial journey from a passive arbiter to an active constitutional guardian. But he cautioned that stepping too far beyond the limits of judicial review risks upending the delicate balance of democracy.
“Judicial activism is here to stay,” Gavai said, before adding with deliberate emphasis, “but it must not become judicial terrorism.” For the judiciary to assume powers best left to elected representatives, he warned, would distort its constitutional mandate.
According to Gavai, courts are obligated to intervene only when legislative or executive branches fail in their duty to uphold citizens’ rights. But such intervention must be rare, restrained, and reserved for exceptional circumstances—such as when a statute blatantly violates fundamental rights or the Constitution’s basic structure.
At the heart of his address was a powerful reflection on India’s constitutional arc. Gavai spoke as a man who rose from a background once branded “untouchable” to now preside as the head of the nation’s judiciary. “The Constitution carries the heartbeat of those who were never meant to be heard,” he said, capturing both its redemptive power and unfinished promise.
He credited Dr BR Ambedkar with a vision of democracy that extended far beyond the institutional separation of powers. “Democracy cannot endure in an unequal society unless power is redistributed among communities, not just institutions,” Gavai asserted, linking political representation with historical justice.
As his speech drew to a close, Gavai quoted from Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak’s seminal work Can the Subaltern Speak? with a pointed twist: “Yes, the subaltern can speak—and they have been speaking all along. The question is no longer whether they can speak, but whether society is truly listening.”
The event was organized in collaboration with Advocate-on-Record Tanvi Dubey and the Oxford Union, creating a platform where the Constitution’s living pulse was heard not just through legal doctrine, but through lived experience.
Gavai’s message was unmistakable: the judiciary is a guardian, not a government—and its greatest strength lies in knowing where its limits are.
