The Dissenting Judgment Versus the Razing of Equality

November 25, 2022

Writing in The Hindu, Jayna highlights the intersectional nature of inequality and how the exclusion of socially backward classes from the EWS category is unconstitutional. She further argues that the exclusion of SC, ST, and OBC communities from reservations would amount to discrimination and a clear violation of the Indian Constitution.

#OpinionPieces

Notes on Allyship

October 12, 2022 | Rajeev Anand Kushwah

In this opinion piece, published by Gaysi, Rajeev Anand Kushwah explores the understanding of Allyship, exploring what constitutes effective allyship, and what support straight allies can extend to queer movements and communities.

#OpinionPieces

On abortion, Supreme Court has listened to Women

October 3, 2022 | Jayna Kothari

CLPR Executive Director Jayna Kothari writes for the Indian Express on the recent Supreme Court judgement which expanded the abortion rights of women and persons who require safe medical termination of pregnancies. She argued that the judgement upheld the right of all women and girls to make reproductive choices for themselves, without undue interference from the state. She emphasised that any deprivation of reproductive healthcare services negatively affects the dignity of women.

#OpinionPieces

Pride Matters | Beyond Sec 377, the call for trans equality reaches a crescendo

July 12, 2022

In this article published by the Hindustan Times, Jayna Kothari highlights the need to support the transgender rights movement amidst the various human rights violations happening worldwide. In her piece, she says “Everyone needs to join the battle for trans rights, because the systemic changes required to put these basic rights in place would benefit everyone.”

#OpinionPieces

Recognising caste-based violence against women

June 1, 2021

In this article published by The Hindu, Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate & Executive Director at Center for Law and Policy Research argues that how the recent Supreme Court judgment in Patan Jamal v. State of Andhra Pradesh missed an opportunity to use the concept of intersectionality to uphold the conviction under the Prevention of Atrocities Act (PoA) 1989. Despite highlighting the need for an intersectional approach that takes into account the multiple marginalities faced by the victim, the apex court failed to set a larger precedent recognising caste-based violence against women.

#OpinionPieces

Priya Ramani verdict has expanded the law on sexual harassment

February 24, 2021 | Jayna Kothari

In this article published by Indian Express, Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate & Executive Director at Center for Law and Policy Research argues that the recent Priya Ramani judgment has expanded the law on sexual harassment and provided the opportunity to widen the defences against defamation law. Most importantly, she states that now, victimisation should also be recognised as a form of sexual harassment and discrimination.

#OpinionPieces

UP anti-conversion law amounts to discrimination and a violation of the right to equality

December 19, 2020 | Jayna Kothari

In this article published by Indian Express, Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate & Executive Director at Center for Law and Policy Research argues that new UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance 2020 leads to serious violation of the right to equality based on religion. She also adds that there is no evidence to support the argument of harms if any, of inter-faith marriages.

#OpinionPieces

At the Intersections of Caste and Gender

October 9, 2020 | Jayna Kothari

In this article published by the Thinking Republic, Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate & Executive Director at Center for Law and Policy Research talks about the intersection of caste and gender highlighting the discrimination faced by Dalit and Adivasi trans persons. She also argues that the urgent for all activists, lawyers, researchers and civil society members to be intersectional in its approach to be able to understand the multidimensional discrimination faced by the persons at the intersections of race, caste, and gender identity.

#OpinionPieces

Reservation as a political imperative

September 18, 2020

In this article published by Frontline, co-authored by Thulasi K Raj along with Kaleeswaram Raj & Bastian Steuwer, they argue that even though a right to the reservation may not be culled out from the equality code of the Constitution, it nevertheless remains a significant political and moral duty.

#OpinionPieces

Why India needs an equality law

June 3, 2020 | Jayna Kothari

In this piece published by Deccan Herald, Jayna Kothari argues that this is a high time when India needs an equality law that would provide a broad framework to address stigma and discrimination prevalent in the society which is quite openly visible during this pandemic and also impose positive duties and obligations on governments and private actors to ensure that all their actions and measures are non-discriminatory.

#OpinionPieces

Benched By the Bar

February 29, 2020 | Jayna Kothari

In this piece published by The Indian Express, Jayna Kothari argues that Bar associations in Karnataka instructing members not to represent accused in sedition cases violates constitutional morality.

#OpinionPieces

The primacy of the elected

July 10, 2019 | Mathew Idiculla

CLPR associate Mathew Idiculla writes for the Hindu about argues that the rights of a legislative assembly of a Union Territory should be seen as an integral element of federalism and that the Supreme Court should affirm the primacy of the elected government.

#OpinionPieces

Castles in the air

October 16, 2018 | Mathew Idiculla

Last week, Paul Romer (along with William Nordhaus) was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work on “endogenous growth theory”. Interestingly, Romer has also been championing the creation of Charter Cities – new cities with distinct laws that seek to attract investment and economic growth. In this op-ed, Mathew Idiculla critically examine the motivations and the realities of such an idea in the Indian context.

#OpinionPieces

Constitution framers did not anticipate use of criminal law in reforming Muslim Personal Law

September 26, 2018 | Vineeth Krishna

Vineeth Krishna, Lead Associate Editor at CLPR, adds a historical perspective to the recent debate on the role of criminal law in Muslim personal law reform triggered by the passing of the Muslim Women (Protection of tights of Marriage) Ordinance, 2018.

This piece is part of ConQuest-ThePrint series of articles on Indian constitutional and political history

#OpinionPieces

Don’t look to SC to do it

September 17, 2018 | Mathew Idiculla

A 5-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court reserved its judgment in a PIL demanding the disqualification of legislators with pending criminal charges. In today’s Deccan Herald, Mathew Idiculla examines whether the Court is the right institution to introduce such electoral reforms.

#OpinionPieces

The Supreme Court trans-formed

September 15, 2018

Jayna Kothari, Executive Director at CLPR and Advocate, Supreme Court of India, writes in The Hindu. In this article, she examines Navtej Johar judgment’s special relevance for transgender rights: the contributions of the trans community to this outcome and how the judgment takes transgender rights forward.

#OpinionPieces

The rainbow in our clouds

September 10, 2018 | Jayna Kothari

Jayna Kothari, Executive Director of CLPR and Advocate, Supreme Court, had represented transgender rights activists, Dr. Akkai Padmashali, Sanaa and Umi Umesh, in the Supreme Court on Section 377 challenge case. Deccan Herald carried Jayna’s piece today where she analyses the key themes the Court relied on to read down Section 377

#OpinionPieces

Manufacturing electoral choice

May 16, 2018 | Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy

Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Managing Trustee at CLPR, writes LiveMint on the Karnataka Elections 2018. He analyzes two elements of the campaign strategy. Firstly, he argues that Congress’s choice of Kannada linguistic nationalism as a campaign frame did not fare well against the cultural and religious national sentiment. Secondly the double-layered campaign structure of the BJP helped them secure the highest seats – leaders from centre and state and the grassroots political workers carried out a well designed campaign strategy.

#OpinionPieces

Karnataka elections: Severe anti-incumbency against Siddaramaiah or Modi-Shah-Yeddyurappa dominance?

May 15, 2018

Mathew Idiculla, Research Consultant at CLPR, provides his opinion on the Karnataka Elections 2018. He argues that there was no visible anti-incumbency against the Siddaramaiah government. However anti-incumbency operated against specific Congress MLA’s. This compounded with the efforts of Modi-Shah-Yedurappa could explain BJP securing highest number of seats.

#OpinionPieces

Federalism and Fairness

April 2, 2018 | Mathew Idiculla

Mathew Idiculla’s op-ed titled ‘Federalism and fariness’ appeared in The Hindu on 3rd April 2018. In this article, in the context of South Indian States’ demand to rethink federalism, Mathew analyses these demands by making constitutional and historical arguments.

#OpinionPieces

Can the Karnataka model of development do for Siddaramaiah what such slogans did for Modi?

March 13, 2018 | Mathew Idiculla

Karnataka State elections are scheduled for the 2nd week of May 2018. Matthew Idiculla of CLPR writes in The Print, that since 2017 Mr.Siddaramaiah has started fashioning a campaign based on the “Karnataka Model of Development”. This model leverages the halo effect created by putting forward development policies and employs the communication power of Twitter to promote “#NavaKarnataka2025”.

#OpinionPieces

Asphyxiated by Politics, Secularism Gasps for Breath: Can the Supreme Court Rescue It?

February 23, 2018

Ashwini and Satya posited that the decision in the Abhiram Singh v Commachen case, in which Hindutva was declared a “way of life”, emboldened this type of action. The view of the RSS seems to have been that action rooted in the Hindu faith, which was a “way of life”, did not violate secularism (Section 123). This gave rise to the question – is the Supreme Court responsible for ensuring that the verdicts it delivers are not misinterpreted by the government?

#OpinionPieces

With new cracks in the judiciary, will politics reclaim its hold on Ayodhya issue?

February 8, 2018

Ashwini Tallur and Satya Prasoon, associates at CLPR, discussed the role of the Supreme Court as a conflict manager, in The Print on 8th Feb 2018. The context for this article was the Babri-Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case (Ayodhya matter) that was heard on the same day. They proposed that the Supreme Court’s decision to tag this case as a title dispute, and have it move through the appeal process like any other title dispute, has helped establish its legitimacy as a neutral entity which has avoided populist measures and instead employed the tools available to the Judiciary to resolve this conflict.

#OpinionPieces

Free Speech and Blind Patriotism in the Times of ‘Tiranga Nationalism’

February 8, 2018

On 8th Feb 2018, Satya Prasoon and Ashwini Tallur of CLPR wrote in The Wire that speech could only be free if it was not protected for its “external” value but only when it was protected when used to express “uncomfortable” and “unconventional” ideas. This analysis of what constitutes free speech was triggered by the recent rise in “Triranga Nationalism”. They examine the appropriation of national symbols by certain groups in the name of “patriotism” and explore how certain public demonstrations demanding social justice or against government actions would be deemed “unpatriotic” if national symbols were used by the protestors.

#OpinionPieces

A path to executive power

January 30, 2018 | Mathew Idiculla

On Jan 21st the President Ram Nath Kovind approved the recommendation of the Election Commission to disqualify 20 MLAs of AAP, as it was deemed that they were holding offices of profit. Matthew Idiculla details out the actions that led to this order. In this op-ed in The Hindu, he also looks at the history of and the reason for this practice and delves into why this practice has continued to flourish in the Indian legislative system.

#OpinionPieces

Rescuing Individual Rights From the Chokehold of Groups Rights

December 3, 2017

On 07.12.2017 the Supreme Court started listening to arguments on the the Goolrokh Gupta vs Burjor Pardiwala and Others [Parsi Identity, Parsi Woman Excommunication] case. In The Wire Ashwini Tallur and Satya Prasoon, associates at CLPR, examine the tension between individual rights and group rights in the context this the primary argument in this case – does the Indian Constitution prioritize individual rights over group rights?

They start with a review of the interpretation of the Special Marriage Act by the Gujarat High Court and then go on to analyze the individual’s Right to Freedom of Religion, the Constitution as a document for “social revolution”, the separation of state and religion, and the role of group rights in minority religions.

#OpinionPieces

How a bystander court went wrong in ruling Gujarat needn’t pay for shrines damaged in 2002 riots

November 19, 2017

The Supreme Court passed judgment on 29th Aug 2017 on the whether the State of Gujarat should pay for the repair of those shrines that were destroyed during the Gujarat riots. The 2 Judge Bench overturned the Gujarat High Court decision and ruled that using income tax revenue to repair the religious buildings would amount to “promoting” religion and run counter to maintaining secularism which was the objective of Article 27. Satya Prasoon, an associate at CLPR, examines this judgement in the context of formal secularism and constitutional citizenship and puts forward an argument for substantive secularism.

#OpinionPieces

As Case Against Azam Khan Moves Forward, Freedom of Speech Once Again at Judicial Mercy

October 6, 2017

Ashwini Tallur and Satya Prasoon, associates at CLPR, wrote in The Wire about the Azam Khan case and the role of the judiciary in protecting the Freedom of Speech. They analyze the judgements passed on this right over the past two years and identify a worrying trend of imposing restrictions on free speech. They contend that it is unconstitutional for the judiciary to impose these restrictions on the grounds of “constitutional compassion” and “constitutional sensitivity”. They conclude that the singular focus on outcomes, by the public and the judiciary, while ignoring the reasoning could lead to untenable or biased verdicts that could take years to overrule.

#OpinionPieces

Soaring Highs, Depressing Lows

October 2, 2017

Satya Prasoon, an associate of CLPR, analyses the cases heard and verdicts delivered by the Supreme Court in its 2nd session (July 3rd – September 22nd 2017) in an article published in Pragati. He weighs the judgements passed by the Court against the judicial process and thinking followed to arrive at these decisions. He points out the seemingly capricious nature of the Court and stresses the need to apply rigorous reasoning and justification to both its administrative and judicial activities. He asserts that by following rigorous reasoning and offering balanced justifications for its actions the Court could set a high bar for public debates and legislative policy decision making.

#OpinionPieces

From Salwa Judum to Gau Rakshaks, Indian Laws are Giving Vigilante an Out

September 18, 2017

In this co-authored piece for the Wire, Satya Prasoon examines the “good faith” armour of cow protection legislations which gives legitimacy to Gau Rakshaks, the civilan vigilante group. While drawing parallel with Salwa Judum, he argues that legitimacy to Gau Rakshak stands on even sloppier moral and legal premise. The argumentative gist is that the ‘good faith’ clause under the cow-protection legislations can even legitimise killing by gau-rakshas as long as done in “undefined” good faith and so, it needs to be struck down.

#OpinionPieces

Subnationalism Not a Threat

September 14, 2017

Mathew Idiculla in his article published in The Hindu, draws upon constitutional provisions, legislative history and political science scholarship to make a brief argument on why subnational politics is not necessarily antithetical to Indian democracy.

#OpinionPieces

A battle of rights: the right to education of children versus rights of minority schools

February 14, 2017 | Jayna Kothari

In an article published in the Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal titled, ‘A battle of rights: the right to education of children versus rights of minority schools’, Jayna Kothari and Aparna Ravi trace two Supreme Court Judgements which have effectively exempted minority schools from the coverage of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 (RTE Act). They critically analyse the developments that led to these judgements and argue that it results in undermining the core value the RTE rests upon, namely the guarantee of the right and access to quality education.

#OpinionPieces

Using Devanagari Numerals on New Currency Dishonours a Historic Compromise

November 25, 2016

Apoorva Sharma writes that a fascinating new challenge has been brought against the newly printed Rs 2000 and Rs 500 notes in the Madras high court. A recent PIL brings into question the fact that the new notes have international numerals and Devanagari numerals printed on them, and argues that they should hence be declared “invalid” since the Indian constitution does not permit the use of Devanagari numerals on currency notes.

#OpinionPieces

Article on the Supreme Court decision seeking to amend Section 2(q) of the Domestic Violence Act

October 17, 2016 | Jayna Kothari

In this Article published in the Kannada Daily, Prajaavaani, Jayna Kothari critiques the decision of the Supreme Court holding Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to be unconstitutional. The impugned section defines “respondents” under the Act to only include “adult males”, thus allowing aggrieved persons under the Act to file a case only against adult male relatives.
Jayna Kothari argues that provisions of the Domestic Violence Act are not meant to be construed as gender neutral. She elaborates how it is necessary and intentional that legal provisions on violence against women should apply only to males as perpetrators of such violence.

#OpinionPieces

Mr. Modi, Don’t Patent Cow Urine

June 16, 2016 | Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party is famously obsessed with the cow, which is venerated in Hindu cosmology. Most Indian states have now banned cow slaughter. The government of Punjab wants to tax alcohol to pay for shelters for stray cattle. Last year, after a Muslim man in Uttar Pradesh was lynched by a mob for eating beef, a cabinet minister from the B.J.P. demanded to know who else was “involved in the crime” — meaning the beef eating, not the man’s killing.

#OpinionPieces

Patently, a missed opportunity

May 25, 2016 | Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy

India’s National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, released in mid-May, is a bewildering document. There are two ways to read this policy. The first is as a gigantic exercise in dissimulation, with a terse declaration — India is not changing its IPR laws — tucked inside a mountain of hot air to keep the U.S. and the European Union warm and happy. The other way to read it is as a serious attempt to make policy of tremendous national significance. A serious reading, however, reveals critical problems.

The National IPR Policy is keenly concerned with generating “awareness” of intellectual property (IP) in the country. (So much so that the word “awareness” appears at least 20 times in the policy.) The policy calls for nothing less than a new gold rush towards IP — roping in everyone from university professors to people in “rural and remote areas”.

#OpinionPieces

Special courts don’t follow Act provisions

January 16, 2016 | Jayna Kothari

This article, reviews the performance of Special Courts established under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012. Using empirical data, from a study conducted by the Centre for Law and Policy Research, the author exposes the failure of these courts in meeting their objective.

#OpinionPieces

Probe is Crucial, Who Investigates is not.

July 1, 2015 | Jayna Kothari

Jayna Kothari examines the procedure to investigate, try and impeach the apex anti-corruption body of the state, the Lokayukta, for corruption. The article is a narration of the provisions of law, relevant authorities and designated police personnel competent to try and investigate such matters.

#OpinionPieces

Smoking out the Elephant in the Room

April 23, 2015

In this article, the author calls for the implementation of internationally accepted guidelines to protect public health policies from being influenced by the vested interests of the tobacco industry. This article was written with reference to Rules that made it mandatory for health warnings to cover 85% of the total display area on packages of tobacco products. The author suggests several proactive measures to address conflicts of interest.

#OpinionPieces

Apply Human Rights Approach to Our Public Bodies

March 16, 2015 | Jayna Kothari

Jayna Kothari examines whether public bodies like Municipal Corporations can be held liable for accidents and deaths of individuals due to their negligence in the maintenance of roads, open drains, and other such hazards. She also delves into using human rights principles to instill a sense of duty of care that public authorities should owe to the public and those who are affected by this negligence in care.

#OpinionPieces

After deleting Section 309

December 22, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

The article critically examines the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court to strike down section 309. Further, the author argues for the need for policy initiative, better access mental health care, and recognition of mental health care and health rights as a necessity for those contemplating and committing suicide.

#OpinionPieces

Who is Tracking Fast Track Courts?

November 4, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

The Justice J.S Verma Committee Report had recommended the setting up of Fast Track courts for dealing with rape and sexual assault as a way to ensure speedy justice. In this article, the authors conducted a detailed study of the working of three such courts in Bangalore that were set up in December, 2013 and examine whether these courts live up to their objective. The article makes a case for the need for witness protection services, so as to safeguard the interests of the victim of sexual assault before and after they have provided evidence.

#OpinionPieces

Between Life and Death

July 28, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

The author probes the question of whether the courts should have the right to decide on matters as personally, religiously, and morally divided as euthanasia. She argues for the need of the Parliament to have authority to decide the issue of Right to Life and the Right to Die instead of allowing the Supreme Court to make judgments on such cases.

#OpinionPieces

Child and punishment

July 17, 2014

This article discusses how the re-enactment of the Juvenile Justice Act is linked to the “moral panic”, which struck the government in the wake of public outrage post the Delhi gang rape. The author argues that the new Juvenile Justice bill deprives children of the protection granted to them by the former Act, and criticizes its provisions on rehabilitation as the Bill does not provide a conducive environment for conduct of trials and levies retributive punishment for some cases.

#OpinionPieces

Restoring legitimacy to PILs

May 3, 2014 | Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy

The authors argue that courts have become a forum for politically partisan disputes by allowing over-representation of the interests of individuals and groups who are already deeply embedded in political and legal institutions. The article points to the absence of any ‘publicly articulated rationale’ for the courts to take suo motu cognizance of any matter as PIL to have rather ‘atrophied and morphed’ PIL from a counter-majoritarian instrument to a counter-democratic one.

#OpinionPieces

Politics collides with arts, letters

April 29, 2014

The author argues that although artistic works should be judged only on artistic merit, the novel is a product of carefully studied and researched literature which is already set in a politically charged context. The author nonetheless contends that considering every person who takes a political stance as a fascist would be absurd.

#OpinionPieces

Disabilities of our democracy

April 25, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

In this article published in The Hindu, Jayna Kothari and David Seidenberg argue that when an electoral system structurally discriminates against particular categories such as persons with disabilities, it is tantamount to a failure of the democracy as a whole.

#OpinionPieces

The invisible voter

April 14, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

The author alludes to the 2004 Supreme Court order in Disability Rights Group v. Election Commission (EC) which had directed the Election Commission to facilitate favourable voting conditions in all states for persons with disability. The author contends that despite the EC’s immediate directive to all state commissions to comply with this order, the actual level of accessibility in voting has not improved. The author proposes technology solutions like voting through mobiles for easy exercise of the right to vote by persons with serious disabilities.

#OpinionPieces

Ensure Disabled get Voting Facilities

April 2, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

In this article, the authors stress on the necessity of ensuring an enabling atmosphere for disabled persons to exercise their fundamental right to vote, which is an essential aspect of democracy. They urge that electoral participation should go beyond the installation of ramps at polling booths, in order to make polling sites accessible.

#OpinionPieces

Loopholes in police oversight body

March 15, 2014

This article analyses the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2012 which established the State and District Police Complaints Authority (“PCA”). It notes that the PCA is incapable of curbing police misconduct.

#OpinionPieces

Strangers in the Night

February 26, 2014

The article notes the rise in the creation of ‘strangers’. ‘Strangers’ are people from outside the mainstream culture of India and who are increasingly marginalised and targeted.

#OpinionPieces

At a Standstill : Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill is not a meaningful improvement on its precursor

February 12, 2014 | Jayna Kothari

The Rights to Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2014 was meant to be a substantial improvement over the existing Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation), Act, 1995. However, this article highlights in two crucial ways how the Bill fails to make a meaningful departure from the existing legislation. Firstly it retains the medical model of disability and does not acknowledge the role of the social environment is disabling certain individuals. Secondly, it does not put any obligations on the private sector to reserve jobs for the disabled.

#OpinionPieces

Telangana: No Constitutional Barriers

January 4, 2014 | Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy

The following article argues for the Union’s power to redraw state boundaries unfettered by constitutional restraints, as imposed by the Parliament or the Supreme Court under Article 3 and critically examines how the absence of the State Assembly resolution in the case of creation of the state of Telangana is not a constitutional barrier. The creation of state-nation arrangements, according to the author, sustains Indian Federalism and political unity.

#OpinionPieces

Closing the care-gap

September 4, 2013 | Jayna Kothari

The new Mental Health Care Bill, 2013, based on the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and moves the current mental health care law from a medical to a social model based on human rights. Some of the progressive aspects of the new bill include the recognition of the legal capacity of persons with psycho-social disabilities and of advance directives, as well as the protection of the rights to equality and dignity. But the bill also has several conditions that could negate the guarantee of these rights. In this respect, the bill has been debated intensely within the disability community. Widely speaking, the need to decriminalise attempts to suicide have been considered by the courts, but only from the perspective of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, not from a mental health perspective. By recognising the link between suicide rates and mental health, the bill is progressive in that it imposes a duty on the government to provide care, treatment and rehabilitation for a person with a mental illness and who has attempted suicide. However, the bill does not give any guidelines on how care and treatment should be provided for such vulnerable persons.

#OpinionPieces

A difficult road to her roots

March 30, 2013 | Jayna Kothari

Chaya’s six-year-old legal battle to search for her roots came to a fruitful end this week. The Karnataka High Court allowed her petition and directed the police to investigate the details of her biological mother and the conditions under which she was given up for adoption by the orphanage. This article examines this case in the light of a person’s right to know her biological or genetic origins.

#OpinionPieces

Poke Me: Why the Supreme Court is not the Bulwark of the Constitution it is made out to be

January 3, 2013 | Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy

Sudhir Krishnaswamy from CLPR and Abhayraj Naik from the Law, Governance and Development Initiative of the Azim Premji University, jointly authored the article “Poke Me: Why the Supreme Court is not the Bulwark of the Constitution it is made out to be” published as a part of the “Poke Me” series by the Economic Times on January 3, 2013.

The article seeks to reassess the character of the Supreme Court of India by examining three propositions highlighted by Nick Robinson’s working paper titled “The Indian Supreme Court by the Numbers” which analyzes the Supreme Court’s case records during the period between 1993 and 2011.

#OpinionPieces

Folly of Mandating Spectrum Auctions

November 23, 2012 | Jayna Kothari

The author in her article elaborates on contrary stances taken on the allotment of spectrum. She concludes by suggesting that the government should play a greater role in deciding modes of allocation and that compelling any one mode of allocation as a constitutional mandate can never be in the interest of the larger common good.

#OpinionPieces

Who Decides?

March 20, 2011 | Jayna Kothari

The author questions the Supreme Courts ignorance of the “Best Interests” test, where the patient’s best interests need to be kept in mind before making a judgment, in the Aruna Shanbaug case. She argues that such a ruling ignores the right to autonomy and self-determination of an individual and the judgment could, in future, affect the rights of those who are severely sick, disabled, and the elderly, adversely.

#OpinionPieces

A Right to Housing?

April 9, 2002 | Jayna Kothari

Jayna Kothari in this article explores the idea of whether the Right to Housing can be seen as a right in itself. She discusses the landmark Olga Tellis judgement and subsequent developments. She examines whether the right to housing exists in International Human Law and argues for the right to housing to be recognized both nationally and internationally.

#OpinionPieces

Filter by

By Categories

By Types

Filter By

Categories

Types

Reset