Does judicial review really strengthen the Constitutional principal of checks and balances or not? Justify your answer. __ I

## Step 1<br />Judicial review is a process where the judiciary has the power to review and determine the constitutionality of laws passed by the legislative branch. This process is a key component of the system of checks and balances, which is a fundamental principle in constitutional democracies.<br /><br />## Step 2<br />The system of checks and balances is designed to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. This is achieved by ensuring that each branch has some measure of influence over the other branches and can choose to block procedures of the other branches.<br /><br />## Step 3<br />Judicial review plays a crucial role in this system by ensuring that the legislative and executive branches do not exceed their constitutional powers. By reviewing and potentially invalidating laws that are found to be unconstitutional, the judiciary acts as a check on the legislative and executive branches.<br /><br />## Step 4<br />However, it is important to note that the judiciary is not infallible. It can make mistakes, and its interpretations of the Constitution can change over time. This means that the judiciary can sometimes overstep its bounds and infringe upon the powers of the other branches.<br /><br />## Step 5<br />Despite these potential issues, the overall effect of judicial review is to strengthen the system of checks and balances. By ensuring that the legislative and executive branches do not exceed their constitutional powers, the judiciary helps to maintain the balance of power among the branches of government.