The writer is professor of law, University of Warwick,and former vice chancellor of Universities of South Gujarat and Delhi.
Upendra Baxi writes: Scandalous judicial delays, measures of decongestion and diversion, and a bold resolution of “who watches the watchman” syndrome now demand urgent apex response.
Accountability angels may insist on a thorough probe into the allegation about lands in Amaravati purchased by two daughters of the learned justice before its designation as capital of the new state.
Asymmetric representation in both societies has generated a long and complex debate concerning women’s representation. But the constitutional histories and judicial action vary.
In ‘Kesavananda Bharati’ case, Supreme Court redefined the relationship between judiciary, executive and legislature. And set limits — constitutional dismemberment is not allowed in the name of amendment.
Contempt proceedings must also consider the “effects upon national honour and prestige in the comity of nations”. This enhancement of the chilling effect is worrisome as any and every call for judicial accountability may be thus indicted.
US Supreme Court recently held Trump administration’s move to deny benefits to child immigrants as unlawful -- upholding the principle that executive can't exercise powers arbitrarily or capriciously.
The difference between the United Nations as a site of normative discursivity and as a site of doing global power politics is sadly manifest even now in the accelerated pace of the pandemic.
Article 14 of the Constitution has been pressed into service as prescribing “a right to rationality” that forbids any “blanket” and “absolute” prohibition.
Ill-informed comments, even by some eminent leaders of the Bar, prevail about the future. They remain ignorant of the fact that Parliament in 1991 enacted the Places of Religious Worship Act.
The sole power to impeach a president (and other civil officers of the United States) rests with the House and the senate when it finds that the president, among other federal officers, has committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes.
This was truly a Kesavananda Bharati moment for the British court. But unlike the full Indian court, there was no riot of concurring and dissenting opinions.
Ram Jethmalani belonged to many parties and to no one as well, for he was robustly independent in thought and action.
ILO convention on the human right to freedom from sexual harassment expands and deepens the rights of working people. The issue needs Parliament’s attention.
It is unnecessary to cite many more features but perhaps it is sufficient to say that ours is not entirely a “liberal” constitutionalism and one needs to appreciate the context of the poignant realities of Indian Partition in which this miraculous document was conceived by far-sighted composite figures.
Looking back, Preet Bharara explores the right, wrong and legally tenuous facets of the law
Access to justice now also means access to judicial infrastructure. The Supreme Court in 2012 has held that “it is the constitutional duty of the government to provide the citizens of the country with judicial infrastructure and means of access to justice”.
International law binds Indian state to prevent, punish acts of genocide. As does Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Attorney General’s concerns about constitutional morality are misplaced.
Composite crime figures hide more than they reveal. Disaggregation of the data could further deterrence, aid efficient policing and enable improvements in social policy.
SC’s Delhi verdict affirms: Constant repair and renewal of constitutionalism is prime function of adjudication
SC does well to circumscribe Karnataka governor. It must define boundaries of gubernatorial discretion
Politics of embarrassment matters more than proposed removal of CJI. No bigger message has emerged
Any reform of the judicial system will have to come from within the court
Tackling the old question of what’s ailing Indian universities with solutions that build well on traditional prescriptions for the system
The ultimate guarantee of fairness as justice lie with the justices themselves