Vir Sanghvi and Pratap Mehta weigh in on this issue, adopting contrasting approaches, and responding at least in part to the concerns raised by Jaitley that were highlighted in the previous post. Their ruminations provide interesting perspectives on what it means to be a liberal in India.
More views on ‘the Baroda case’
Further reading
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...
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...
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...
A mass movement led by students has ushered in a new dawn in Bangladesh. What began as a claim for reform of the quota system transformed into a national movement to oust Bangladesh’s long-standing...
In India, liberal means one who supports the Congress party. It is a new tag chosen straight from American politics. We all know it is meaningless in our context, but hey, people like it and it seems to stick.
Ironically I have seen the Congress party being referred to as the Grand Old Party in some newspaper columns, which is funny to say the least.