By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

intended to furtmore national policy. Robert Martin in his work (supra) cautionsthat such judicial decisions may backfirst. He states at p.128 of his book:“If the courts in exercising their powers of review are such to be frustrating thepolies of the government or the party then their usefulness and effectiveness inthe whole procese of government will decline. A more useful approach might befor the courts to see their role as organs in the process of policy implementation.The courts have to show a greater concern to the national policy when exercisionjudicial review. This is becameto, there is the wider question of the democraticacceptability of judicial review. The entitled legitimacy of judical review dependsin the ultimate of the geneal community in the way in wich the Court perform thefunction assigned to then under the doctrine of separation of Powers. Judicialreview has no support other than public confidence. Thus it behaves the Courtsto be over sensitive to the paramount read to refrain from trespassing upon theprovince of Parliament. There is need to act with great circumspection and withclose regard to the daners of usurping or encroaching on any function with thestatute has specifically conferred on Parliament or the Execut. As Mr. JusticeFrankfurter of the Supreme Court of U.S.A acknowledged in Trop Vrs Dulles;(1957) 356 U.S. 86 at p. 119:“All power is, in Madison’s phrase, of an encroaching nature.Judicial power is not insure against this human weakness. Italso must be on guard against encroaching beyond its proper bounds, and notthe less so since the only restraint upon it is self – restraint.”625