Textualism Vs Purposivism Debate

Textualism and purposivism are two key approaches to statutory interpretation in Indian law.
- Textualism:
- Focuses on the literal meaning of the words in the statute.
- Emphasizes the importance of the text itself over external factors.
- Purposivism:
- Looks at the broader purpose and intent behind the statute.
- Considers legislative history and societal context to interpret the law.
Could you please specify if you have a particular statute or legal issue in mind that you need help with?

Sure, let's compare and contrast textualism and purposivism in a more detailed manner.
Textualism:
- Focuses on the literal meaning of the text.
- Avoids external factors such as legislative history.
- Prioritizes what the law explicitly states.
- Example: If a law states "no vehicles in the park," textualists would interpret it strictly to exclude all vehicles.
Purposivism:
- Considers the broader purpose and intent behind the law.
- Takes into account legislative history and societal context.
- Aims to achieve the law's intended outcome.
- Example: For the same "no vehicles in the park" law, purposivists might allow ambulances or maintenance vehicles if they serve the park's purpose of safety and upkeep.
Do you have a specific statute or case in mind where you want to apply these interpretations?