Judicial Oversight Through Mandamus a Comparative Analysis of Canada, UK, USA and Australia

Abstract

Originally from common law, the term "mandamus" means "we command" in Latin, reflecting its function as a court order directing compliance with legal obligations. The writ of mandamus is an important legal tool that forces government officials or public authorities to carry out their legally designated duties. It plays a vital role in safeguarding the rule of law and protecting individual rights across various countries, including India, the United States, Canada, and Australia. In India, Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution grant the Supreme Court and High Courts the authority to issue mandamus, allowing them to protect fundamental rights and direct public authorities to take required actions. The Indian judiciary has ruled that when an authority has disregarded or refused to fulfill a clear legal responsibility, mandamus may be issued. It cannot, however, impede the exercise of discretion or force legislative action. Although less frequently utilized, mandamus is nevertheless important in the US. When lesser courts or government representatives don't carry out their responsibilities, it enables higher courts to order them to do so. Strict criteria must be met for issuance, including a manifest entitlement to relief and the absence of any other suitable remedy. Canada's strategy is very similar to that of the United States, where mandamus is usually used in administrative law situations. Mandamus should only be imposed when there is a clear legal responsibility and a failure to perform, according to Canadian courts. Mandamus is also accepted as a judicial remedy in Australia, namely under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act. According to Australian courts, mandamus can be given to enforce statutory obligations but not to restrict the use of discretion. In summary, although the writ of mandamus has a similar function in all of these jurisdictions that is, to ensure that legal obligations be fulfilled its use and restrictions differ greatly, reflecting the legal systems and ideals of each nation.