Senior lawyers and retired judicial officers have voiced significant concern over what they describe as a pattern of judicial overreach into the internal affairs of political parties. This follows a series of recent court rulings where judges have intervened in party membership, candidate selection, and leadership disputes.
Prominent legal figures, including former Supreme Court Justice Madan B. Lokur, have publicly criticized such interventions. In a 2025 opinion piece, he argued that while courts must act against arbitrariness, they should not micromanage political parties, which are private associations. This sentiment is echoed by senior advocates who warn that excessive judicial interference could undermine the autonomy of political organizations.
The debate centers on the balance between ensuring democratic principles within parties and respecting their internal autonomy. Critics point to specific cases, such as the Indian National Congress's internal election procedures and disputes within other regional parties, where court orders have directly shaped internal party processes. Legal experts note that the judiciary's role is typically to ensure constitutional compliance, not to administer party affairs.
This ongoing legal discourse highlights a tension in democratic systems, where the courts are increasingly called upon to resolve internal political conflicts, raising questions about the separation of powers and the limits of judicial review.
