2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law

CONCLUSION
The Supreme Court seemed to speak in
different voices in the year 2016. It gave
fundamental rights such as the freedom of
speech a very narrow interpretation. But
some benches of the Court penned broad
and expansive directions on the reproductive
rights of women and rights to compensation,
treatment, and rehabilitation of
acid attack survivors. One could question
whether the Supreme Court interprets rights
consistently.
It is also important to note that the judiciary
has vehemently protected its autonomy,
even though this attracted severe criticism
for a lack of transparency. The perceived
threat to the independence of the judiciary
seems to eclipse the need for a change and
participation in the judicial appointment
process. Their steadfast protection of judicial
autonomy indicates that courts tend to
preach accountability without practicing it.
92 | I•CONnect-Clough Center