Description: Judicial activism refers to the practice of judges interpreting the law in a way that reflects their own beliefs or values, rather than strictly applying existing law. This phenomenon can manifest in judicial rulings that appear to be influenced by personal or political considerations, raising debates about the impartiality and objectivity of the judicial system. Judicial activism can be seen as a tool for promoting social change and protecting fundamental rights, but it can also be criticized for undermining the separation of powers and the rule of law. In this context, judges take on a more proactive role in creating public policy, which can lead to tensions between the judiciary and other branches of government. The relevance of judicial activism lies in its ability to influence legislation and the everyday lives of citizens, as well as its role in defending human rights and civil liberties. However, its practice also raises questions about the legitimacy of judicial decisions and the balance between legal interpretation and the creation of new norms.
