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
What happens when a Constitution promises rights, but the systems built around it keep concentrating power? In this episode, LAOT host Arnav Mathur speaks with constitutional scholar Dr...
In this article, the authors examine whether the Indian Space Research Organisation qualifies as an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. They argue that space exploration in India...
The Law and Other Things Blog (LAOT), in collaboration with the Community for the Eradication of Discrimination in Education and Employment (CEDE), is inviting applications for the position of Legal...
India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention but has historically adhered to international human rights principles. However, recent judicial responses, particularly the Supreme Court’s...
In this article, the author explores the scope of the judicial review of Money Bills by questioning the neutrality of the Speaker’s certification of the Money Bills and analysing Justice...
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...