This paper examines the globalization of interpretivism, focusing on the pivotal role of judicial dissents in shaping constitutional law and legal principles, both within India and across jurisdictions worldwide. The study highlights how dissenting opinions-far from being mere minority views-serve as instruments of transformative constitutionalism and catalysts for legal evolution and reform. Through analysis of landmark Indian dissents, such as those by Justices Syed Mahmood, Radhabinod Pal, H.R. Khanna, and D.Y. Chandrachud, the paper demonstrates the enduring influence of interpretive dissent on domestic law and its cross-border impact, citing instances where foreign courts have relied on Indian dissents to adjudicate issues of constitutional rights and privacy. The research further explores the integration of international principles and comparative jurisprudence, including references to global conventions on judicial independence and due process. By underscoring the symbiotic relationship between interpretivism, dissent, and constitutional transformation, this study advances the discourse on judicial creativity and independence as foundational elements in the protection of civil liberties and the continual evolution of rule of law.
