Introduction
The term "Public Interest Litigation" (PIL) combines "Public Interest" and "Litigation." "Public interest" refers to matters in which the general public or community at large has a financial interest or some interest that affects their legal rights or responsibilities. "Litigation" means a legal action initiated in a court of law to enforce a right or seek a remedy. Therefore, lexically, "public interest litigation" refers to a legal process conducted in court to preserve the public interest when the rights of an individual or group have been violated.
The Advanced Law Lexicon describes "Public Interest Litigation" as "a legal action brought before a court of law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which the public or a class of the community has a financial interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected." In this blog various aspects of the public interest litigation will be discussed and how it provides a mechanism for the protection of the public interest.
Evolution of Public Interest Litigation in India
According to Article 39A of the Indian Constitution, the concept of public interest litigation (PIL) aligns with legal protections for swift social justice delivery. Before the 1980s, only those directly affected by an injustice could approach the courts. This meant that the vast majority of illiterate people had no real connection to the laws made by the government, or the rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
However, this situation changed in the post-emergency era when the Supreme Court significantly relaxed the requirements for locus standi (legal standing) and who could be considered an aggrieved party. This judicial revolution of the 1980s, largely driven by Justices P. N. Bhagwati and V. R. Krishna Iyer, transformed the Indian Supreme Court into a court for all Indians. Consequently, any Indian citizen, consumer advocacy group, or social action group could approach the Supreme Court to seek legal remedies when public interests were at stake. Furthermore, public interest claims could be filed without incurring the exorbitant court fees required for private civil actions.
The first documented PIL case, in 1979, addressed the inhumane treatment of undertrial prisoners. In Hussainara Khatoon v State of Bihar [1], an attorney filed a PIL in response to a news report highlighting the plight of hundreds of prisoners in Bihar jails awaiting trial. As a result, more than 40,000 undertrial prisoners were released, recognizing the right to a speedy trial as a crucial fundamental right. Other cases followed a similar pattern. For instance, in Citizen for Democracy v State of Assam [2], the Supreme Court ruled that a prisoner could not be forced to wear handcuffs or other restraints while in custody, being transported, attending court, or returning home.
There have been instances where even letters and telegrams sent to the court were taken up as PILs. Filing a PIL is not as difficult as filing other legal actions.
Public interest litigation (PIL) has proven to be an effective tool in achieving justice in society. Traditionally, law and judicial systems have aimed to ensure societal justice. PIL, rather than focusing solely on individual rights, expands the legal system's reach to include underrepresented groups. It also facilitates the realization of collective rights, for which individual litigation is neither practical nor efficient. Despite its significance, PIL has received limited attention in discussions about improvements to civil judicial systems worldwide.
Aspects of Public Interest Litigation
Remedial in Nature
PIL's remedial nature differs from the normative criteria for locus standi. The values outlined in Part IV of the Indian Constitution were tacitly incorporated into Part III. The Indian judiciary transformed the procedural structure of Indian law to promote welfare by incorporating the objectives of Part IV into Part III. Notable cases such as Bandhu Mukti Morcha v Union of India and Unnikrishnan v State of A.P. exemplify this shift in the court's approach.
Representing Standing
The standing exception can be creatively broadened to include representative standing, allowing a third party to file a habeas corpus petition on behalf of someone unable to represent themselves. The Indian definition of PIL is much broader than the American one, essentially serving as a modified class action.
Citizen Standing
The doctrine of citizen standing significantly expands the court's authority, enabling it to defend the rule of law whenever it is threatened by government misconduct, not just protecting individual rights.
Non-Adversarial Litigation
The Supreme Court stated in People's Union for Democratic Rights v Union of India [3] that PIL "is a totally different kind of litigation from ordinary traditional litigation, which is basically adversarial in nature, involving a dispute between two parties, one making a claim or seeking relief and the other resisting it."
Important Features of Public Interest Litigation
Human Rights Framework
PIL creates a new framework for human rights, broadly defining fundamental rights to equality, life, and individual freedom. These rights include the right to a speedy trial, free legal counsel, respect for personal dignity and means of support, housing, healthcare, and a healthy environment. It also encompasses freedom from slavery, sexual assault, solitary confinement, and other forms of abuse.
Democratizing Legal Access
By democratizing access to the legal system, these redefined rights enable courts to enforce them through PILs. The standard locus standi rule is relaxed to allow any civic-minded individual or social action group to petition the court on behalf of underprivileged groups. Notices can be obtained from the court even through a telegram or letter.
Judicial Supervision (Epistolary Jurisdiction)
Courts supervise governmental facilities such as jails, women's protective homes, children's homes, and mental hospitals. This "creeping jurisdiction" allows the court to assume control over these institutions to improve their management and administration.
Innovative Knowledge Gathering
Courts often establish socio-legal commissions of inquiry or send officers to conduct investigations. Organizations like the National Human Rights Commission, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), or specialists may assist in investigating human rights violations, a process known as investigative litigation.
Procedure of Filing Public Interest Litigation
Filing
A PIL petition is filed similarly to a writ petition. In a High Court, a PIL must be presented with two copies of the petition (four sets in the Supreme Court). Each respondent must be notified in advance, and the petition must include proof of service.
Procedure
A court fee of Rs. 50 per respondent is required. The proceedings follow the same process as other cases. The judge may appoint a commissioner to investigate issues like pollution or sewer problems. The judge holds a final hearing, makes a decision, and the opposing party or petitioner files comments or replies.
Against Whom PIL Can Be Filed
PILs can be filed against the state, federal government, or municipal authorities, not against private individuals. The term "state" includes the Indian Government, Parliament, state governments and legislatures, and local authorities operating in India or under the control of the Indian Government, as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution.
PIL as a Tool for Social Change
PIL is a crucial tool for enacting social change and improving the lives of all societal groups. In a developing country like India, PIL has been used to combat pervasive social issues, targeting the poorest individuals. For example, the Supreme Court ordered the release of bonded laborers in Bandhu Mukti Morcha v Union of India [4]. In Murli S. Dogra v Union of India [5], the court banned smoking in public areas. The court set guidelines for rape victim rehabilitation and compensation in Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum v Union of India. The Supreme Court established criteria to prevent sexual harassment of working women in Vishaka v State of Rajasthan [6].
Conclusion
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plays a significant role in the civil justice system by providing underprivileged groups with a path to justice, some of whom may not even be aware of their rights. Additionally, it offers a method for enforcing rights, where it may be challenging to locate the offended party or when such parties lack the motivation to approach the courts. PIL can improve governance by holding the government accountable. It also empowers civil society to actively raise public awareness of human rights, give voice to underrepresented groups, and influence government policy.
[1] Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1360.
[2] Citizens for Democracy v State of Assam, (1995) 3 SCC 743.
[3] People's Union for Democratic Rights v Union of India AIR 1972 SC 1473.
[4] Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India & Ors 1984 AIR 802, SCR (2) 67.
[5] Murli S. Dogra v Union of India AIR 1999 SC 316.
[6] Vishaka & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Ors (1997) 6 S.C.C 241.