Prashant Bhushan is an advocate at the Supreme Court of India.
It ignores India’s binding commitment to non-refoulement and obligations in prohibiting genocide.
Prashant Bhushan writes: I am shocked that the court holds me guilty of “malicious, scurrilous, calculated attack” on the institution of administration of justice. I am dismayed that the Court has arrived at this conclusion without providing any evidence of my motives to launch such an attack.
Sending Rohingya back would mean violating the right to life, constitutional morality.
In such circumstances, it is the duty of the judiciary to step in against this brutal suppression of peaceful protests. However, we are yet to see any effective and strong action by the judiciary.
The fate of close to two million people excluded from the NRC in Assam rests with the Foreigners Tribunals. The constitutionality and conduct of these quasi-judicial bodies are questionable.
'Ram Jethmalani was always a larger-than-life figure in the courts and in the country,' writes human rights advocate Prashant Bhushan.
The latest arrests represent a new and extremely dangerous phase in the steady erosion of civil liberties, fundamental rights and indeed democracy in India.
Supreme Court verdict recognises citizens’ right to hold protests at Jantar Mantar. But by leaving much to executive discretion, Court has also paved the way for restriction of the right
Supreme Court has let go of the opportunity to immunise the allocation of cases from abuse of power by the CJI and to democratise the process.
The allegations by the judges also raise serious doubts about the independence of the judiciary, given that an estimated 45 to 70 per cent of litigation involves the government.
Unless we quickly get our act together, we must be prepared to face the consequences. In any food crisis, it is the top of the food chain that suffers the most. In the case of farmer’s distress, the top of food chain is us — the end consumer.
To preserve judiciary’s independence, appointment process must be transparent
The bending by AIADMK and BJP-led governments to vote-bank pressures in Tamil Nadu is regressive. It ignores the judgments of the Supreme Court.
The decline in political discourse is evident in the language and imagery used by politicians to belittle their rivals. Judiciary has failed to rein in such people.
Centre must begin by disclosing which of the Panama Papers companies had been declared by their owners. Non-declaration must be prosecuted
Justice Iyer gave a purposive and expansive interpretation to the Constitution
Appointments commission proposed by the UPA suffered from vices of both pre-1993 and existing systems.
We need to ask why government’s ambitious project to build a line to link Kashmir Valley with nation’s rail network remains besieged