Some thoughts on the Naz decision, here. In many ways, the shameful decision is a consequence of what has been unfolding in India for a few years now, where there an emphasis only on outcomes. The line between the legal process and the political process has been jettisoned and core judicial values like independence, rationality, and finality have been betrayed in the past three decades through forms of adjudication whose culprits are judges, lawyers, and litigants alike. The upshot of this has been that the Supreme Court no longer believes it needs to attend to matters like precedent, the textual content of legal materials, doctrinal coherence, and so forth. The running joke is that there is not one Supreme Court of India but many – the verdict you get will turn on which courtroom your matter gets listed in.
The Court’s Decline
Further reading
In this piece, the author argues that the deceased deserve a right to dignity and cautions against the dangers of AI-driven digital resurrections, which could reduce the dead to mere commodities. To...
In this piece, the author argues that the deceased deserve a right to dignity and cautions against the dangers of AI-driven digital resurrections, which could reduce the dead to mere commodities. To...
Blurb: This article maps the four statutory criteria central to the sex-consent matrix, which render consent peripheral while elevating social control and sexual obligation. Thereafter, it reads the...
Summary: A fortnightly feature inspired by I-CONnect’s weekly “What’s New in Public Law” feature that addresses the lacuna of a one-stop-shop public law newsletter in the Indian legal space. What’s...
Summary: In this piece, we continue the discussion on Prof. Nivedita Menon’s latest book, Secularism as Misdirection: Critical Thought from the Global South. The summary of the book by Prof...
Summary: In this piece, we continue the discussion on Prof. Nivedita Menon’s latest book, Secularism as Misdirection: Critical Thought from the Global South. The summary of the book by Prof...