DAKSH’s Access to Justice Survey is the first systematic study in India to explore the needs and expectations of the users of the judicial system—the litigants. The survey was conducted across 305 lower courts across the country and interviewed more than 9000 litigants.
The survey maps litigants’ perceptions on several issues relevant to their experiences in the judicial system, such as the factors that influence the ease with which they can access the system, their ability to use the court system to resolve disputes effectively, and the socio-economic fallout of judicial delay. The survey has gathered essential information about the background of litigants, nature of cases they are involved in, relationship between opposing litigants, and previous litigation experience.
We will share the results of this survey at the DAKSH – National Law University (Delhi) Access to Justice Conference in Delhi on 23 April 2016. Details of the event are here. If you are in Delhi, please attend.
The blog analyses the Mineral Area Development Authority decision, specifically analysing the question of when states can start taxing mining entities, along with an analysis of the doctrine of...
Blurb: The article argues for disability-inclusive prison reforms, emphasizing the right to reasonable accommodation and the right to dignity for incarcerated persons with disabilities in light of...
Blurb: The article argues for disability-inclusive prison reforms, emphasizing the right to reasonable accommodation and the right to dignity for incarcerated persons with disabilities in light of...
The first part of this analysis delved into the Supreme Court’s judgment in Ashok Kumar Sharma & Ors v. Union of India, where it misread the International Rule of Law (IRoL) by focusing on...
Blurb: A petition was filed in the Supreme Court, seeking the suspension of military exports from India to Israel in light of the unfolding armed conflict in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The...
Blurb: In his recent rejoinder, Dalmia clarifies the “expressed an opinion” standard to better define when recusal may be appropriate. He addresses the four rebuttals that the author raised and...