Feminist Killjoy…But With a Heart
India is currently witnessing a spate of protests against gender-based violence targeted towards women. The rape and murder of a trainee doctor in Kolkata, allegations against influential figures of the Malayalam film industry, and wrestler Vinesh Phogat’s accusations of sexual harassment against BJP leader Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh have led to demands for stricter legal consequences. However, I urge feminists to eschew reliance on the punitive state. It is paramount that feminists “break the wheel” and not adopt the tools of the oppressor by advocating for punishment, shame, and stigma.
Continue reading >>
The Bombay High Court Dismisses the Ministry of Truth
In 2023, the Indian central government established a Fact Check Unit to monitor online content related to ‘any business of the Central Government’ and order the takedown of any information that it considered ‘fake or false or misleading.’ The FCU itself was envisaged as a public body and a part of the central government. As it seems, the Indian central government wanted to depart from existing liability rules protecting platforms in all cases of online criticism of the Indian State. As the FCU would be the last arbiter of what could be said online in India about the central government, the amendment instituted what could be called a ‘Ministry of Truth’. This was struck down by the Bombay High Court.
Continue reading >>
Jurisprudence of Convenience
Last month, in Nipun Malhotra v. Sony Pictures Film India Private Ltd, the Indian Supreme Court delivered an opinion on the limits of protected speech under Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution. While the opinion touched upon several important aspects of the free speech right, it is replete with behavioral guidance, and its language makes it hard to discern the binding legal principles. I argue that courts should approach cases involving hard questions of constitutional law with extreme caution in terms of their potential implication on the growth (or absence) of a consistent doctrine.
Continue reading >>
Kashmir’s Legal Exceptionalism Reinforced
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court recently passed an order, rejecting a plea by the petitioner, Sublime Software, challenging a blocking decision by the Union Government under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. n this blogpost, we critically analyze the Delhi High Court's ruling, arguing that it exemplifies a troubling trend of legal exceptionalism in Kashmir. We critique the order for its unqualified deference to the states’ national security claims, failing to examine the merits of those claims at all.
Continue reading >>
Secret Campaigns and Masked Messages
Every election season in India reignites a familiar concern: the pervasive influence of financial resources on the democratic process. While the Election Commission of India, in conjunction with the judiciary and various state apparatuses, consistently underscores the link between monetary power and electoral outcomes, a significant loophole persists. This blogpost examines that loophole: the unchecked power of surrogate advertising on social media platforms and uncovers the systemic failures that enable political parties to exploit these gaps, perpetuating financial inequalities in the democratic process.
Continue reading >>
The Genre-Bending of Climate Litigation in India
In a widely acclaimed judgment, India recently saw its first climate ruling issued by the Supreme Court. The Court derived the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change from Article 21 and Article 14 of the Constitution. The ruling of the Supreme Court has been classified in this blog as an important step in connecting human rights and climate change. In this blog post, I offer another overarching route that cases connected to climate change in India have taken, which is genre-bending in that they use environmental litigation as the pathway to also address climate change.
Continue reading >>Uniting the Indian Opposition
More than 35 parties have come together to form a big-tent united opposition bloc called the ‘Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance’ (“INDIA”) to jointly fight the BJP in the 2024 General Elections. They believe that if the opposition could field a single common candidate against every BJP candidate, they could potentially defeat the BJP or at least challenge its ambitious goal of winning a supermajority. The strategy of uniting the opposition against an electorally strong and populist leader is not uncommon, both for India and globally. In the following paragraphs, I’ll discuss how this strategy has played out in the recent past and what lessons INDIA could learn from such a global experience.
Continue reading >>
India’s New Constitutional Climate Right
The Supreme Court of India delivered a historic judgement on climate change and human rights in M.K. Ranjitsinh and Others v. Union of India and Others (hereinafter “M.K. Ranjitsinh”) on March 21, 2024. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice, D.Y. Chandrachud, formulated a new constitutional right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change by drawing upon Article 21 (the fundamental right to life and personal liberty) and Article 14 (the fundamental right to equality) of the Indian Constitution. The final judgement is a remarkable development for the evolution of constitutional climate litigation in India
Continue reading >>
The End of a Dream?
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) may have officially declared war on the hijab in 2022, but the Hindu right’s battle strategy has been set in place since at least 2014 when the BJP rose to power under the leadership of Narendra Modi. A tenacious master of populism, the BJP has successfully altered the mainstream Hindu perception of the Muslim as a threat to secularism. Within this imaginary, Muslims are believed to constantly seek exemptions from the secular regulations constraining the Hindu community.
Continue reading >>
Selective, Reactive and Liminal
With a staggering 450 million internal migrants (as of the 2011 census), migration has become integral to the political economy of India. India also has the largest diaspora in the world, numbering 18 million people. The modes, institutions, and ideological underpinnings of migration governance vis-à-vis both internal and international migration have witnessed substantial shifts and continuities ever since the ascendance of the NDA (National Democratic Alliance) led Modi government in 2014.
Continue reading >>
The Right to Education and Democratic Backsliding in India
Since the election of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to power in the federal elections in India in 2014, the country’s performance in key indicators of democratic quality has suffered. Over the course of its two terms in power, the party has sought to subvert key institutions for accountability, enact an ethno-cultural majoritarian electoral agenda, and use federal law enforcement agencies against their political opponents. While there is extensive literature on the erosion of civil-political rights in the past ten years, the effects of the BJP government on social rights like education and healthcare remain under-explored. Therefore, in this post, I explore three striking dimensions of primary educational policy under the BJP government.
Continue reading >>
India’s Push-and-Pull on Reproductive Rights
For a piece mapping India’s push-and-pull on reproductive rights – the expanse of its protection and the edges it comes up against – history is a good place to start. Rights in the reproductive sphere are relatively new to India. While India enacted a seemingly liberal abortion legislation as early as 1971, concerns about women’s rights were hardly the drivers behind it. Women’s bodies were a means to achieve the State’s end of population control. It is difficult to justify if women were truly seen as rights-holders. Did this change in recent years?
Continue reading >>
Subordination and Arbitrariness in Citizenship Law
In 2019, the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party returned to power in India. The Bharatiya Janata Party oversaw the enactment of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 (‘CAA’) which gave Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian (but not Muslim) migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan a fast-tracked pathway to Indian citizenship. This post argues that the CAA is unconstitutional, and uses it as an example to clarify two important under-theorised Indian constitutional principles: anti-subordination and arbitrariness.
Continue reading >>
Reimagining Indian Federalism
As India’s new dominant party system coalesced after 2014, the country entered a phase of centralisation. India has always had federalism with a strong centre, but from the late 1980s to the mid-2010s, political and economic regionalism and national coalition governments encompassing national and regional parties produced an appearance of deepening federalisation. Since 2014, when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) became the first party in over 25 years to win an outright parliamentary majority, the twin pillars of political centralisation under a dominant party system and economic concentration, have once again drawn attention to the contested nature of India’s federal contract.
Continue reading >>
Civil Society and its Engagement with the Constitution
The Indian Constitution is as much a culmination of the ideas of the freedom movement against colonial powers as it is of the achievement of a social revolution through law. Our Constitution, which was inspired by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, thus, not only provided for political freedom from foreign rule and established a democratic republic, but it also provided a road map to undo the deeply entrenched hierarchies, inequalities, and social exclusions in our society and therefore for a social transformation. Much of the civil society interventions of the last seven decades have been to work for redeeming the promise of the constitution inside and outside courts.
Continue reading >>
Reconceptualizing Legislative Privileges
Earlier this month, the Indian Supreme Court delivered a judgment in a reference pertaining to the law and scope of legislative privileges under the Indian Constitution. The primary question before the court was whether legislative privileges extend to the protection from prosecution of a legislator who receives a bribe to speak or vote in a certain manner in the legislature. In the following sections of this post, I’ll first discuss the existing law on legislative privileges in India, which is unique in its origination and formulation. I’ll then argue that there is a need to reconceptualize the understanding of legislative privileges in order to support the legislative systems in performing their roles and functions in their true essence.
Continue reading >>
Privileges Constrained
Last week, the Indian Supreme Court delivered its judgment in Sita Soren v. Union of India, holding that parliamentary privilege – the constitutionally recognized legal immunity of legislators – does not extend to bribe-taking for exercising their legislative vote or speech a certain way. In this blog post, I discuss the Court’s formulation of the essentiality test, as well as its conclusions on the availability of privilege for bribe-taking. I argue that while the ruling can strengthen democratic institutions since it protects the integrity of legislative processes, certain risks in the essentiality test’s composition – which risk depriving important legislative functions of privilege – must be addressed.
Continue reading >>
On the Politics of Non-Transparent Electoral Funding in India
Last week, a five-judge bench of the Indian Supreme Court delivered a significant verdict adjudicating the constitutionality of the Electoral Bond Scheme (“EBS”). The EBS introduced a novel method of making ‘anonymous’ donations to Indian political parties, both by individuals and a body of individuals. The judgment makes a democracy-enabling jurisprudential step in extending the right to information of voters to the details of political funding received by political parties in an effort to cement transparency and accountability as the central values of the electoral exercise.
Continue reading >>
Absolute Truths and Absolutist Control
Last week, the Bombay High Court delivered its judgment in Kunal Kamra v. Union of India, comprising a split verdict on the constitutional validity of the Information Technology Rules, 2023. The rules install an institutional regime for determining – and warranting takedown by social media intermediaries – of content relating to the Central Government deemed “fake, false or misleading”. This regime was challenged on three main grounds – first, its violation of citizens’ free expression due to “fake, false, or misleading” speech being constitutionally protected; second, the pedestalization of state-related information, such that it enters public discourse with a single, truthful formulation, as being an illegitimate and disproportionate measure; and third, the violation of natural justice in enabling the state to determine truth and falsity concerning itself.
Continue reading >>When Discrimination is Not Enough
The Supreme Court, India’s apex constitutional court, recently delivered its disappointing decision in Supriyo Chakraborty v Union India (Supriyo), rejecting marriage equality in Indian law. The much-awaited decision was heard by a constitution bench (five judges) of the Supreme Court and dealt with far-reaching questions of both Indian constitutional law and family law. The decision is characteristic of the Indian Supreme Court’s ongoing phase of great deference to the executive and legislative branches but also marks a sharp and worrying break from the court’s otherwise progressive jurisprudence on issues of gender and sexuality.
Continue reading >>
The Basic Structure Doctrine, Article 370 and the Future of India’s Democracy
A constitution bench (five-judges) of the Supreme Court of India recently concluded the hearings related to the the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution and the bifurcation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) into two Union Territories. How the Supreme Court finally decides this instant case will have far-reaching constitutional implications. In particular, the basic structure challenge pressed upon by the Petitioners, is likely to determine the future of India’s democratic federal architecture and the structural balance of power between the Union and states.
Continue reading >>
Using the Constitution for Partisan Benefits
Last month, the Indian parliament passed the 106th amendment to the Constitution. It inserted several provisions to the Indian Constitution, collectively providing for horizontal reservation of one-third of directly elected seats of the House of the People, the state legislative assemblies, and the Delhi legislative assembly for women. In this blog, I discuss the political motivations underlying the enactment of this amendment and argue that this amendment is an opportunistic attempt by the incumbent government to reap partisan benefits using the Constitution before the upcoming state and general elections. Such actions demystify the idea that constitutions are a place for high-order politics. The amendment shows that with enough numbers, constitutions could easily be reduced into a political tool for furthering dominant political interests.
Continue reading >>Constitutional Pluralism and Article 370
Recently, the Indian Supreme Court finished hearing oral arguments on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019 which extended all provisions of the Indian Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir. In the midst of the arguments, the Court pondered upon the nature of the relationship between the Constitution of India and the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir. While the Court is unlikely to hand down an authoritative ruling on this relationship, the exchanges between the judges and lawyers offer us a valuable avenue to explore. By analysing the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly Debates, this piece examines the nature of the relationship envisaged by the two constitutions. I argue that the constitutional principle that undergirded the previously existing constitutional relationship between India and Jammu and Kashmir is heterarchy.
Continue reading >>
Decolonising Criminal Law?
On August 11, the last day of the ongoing session of Parliament, the Indian Government tabled a notice that it wished to introduce three new bills on the Floor of the House for consideration. These were proposed statutes to replace the holy trinity of Indian criminal law: The Indian Penal Code of 1860, the Criminal Procedure Code of 1973, and the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, were to be replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam respectively. Even though the reform was marketed as an attempt to break from the colonial origins of criminal law, it actually represents a resurgence of the colonial-style authoritarian approach, rather than an effort to build upon the relatively modest progress made half a century ago in advancing individual freedom and civil rights.
Continue reading >>Trivialising Privacy through Tribunals in India
On 11th August 2023, India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (‘DPDP Act’) has received Presidential assent. The Act’s passing is critical in light of increasing concerns about data security and surveillance in India, including allegations that the government has illegally been using spyware against activists. Moreover, the government and its agencies are major data fiduciaries, having access to various identification and biometric data that have in the past been breached on a large scale. Given this, it is vital that the DPDP Act is able to function effectively and independently against the government in cases of non-compliance. However, a novel provision bestowing appellate jurisdiction on a Tribunal that lacks both the necessary expertise and independence is likely to hinder this goal.
Continue reading >>
An Attack on Indian Democracy
Last week, the Indian government introduced a bill in Parliament providing for, inter alia, the mechanism for appointing Election Commissioners in India. The bill proposes the creation of a three-member Selection Committee composed of the Prime Minister, a Union Minister nominated by the Prime Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition to make recommendations to the President in this regard. The proposed Executive-dominated Selection Committee raises several questions about the conduct of free and fair elections in India. In the paragraphs to follow, I first discuss a recent Supreme Court decision that preceded the introduction of this bill and how this bill, as a response to the Court decision, is instructive to constitutional drafters. I then discuss the possible approaches the Supreme Court of India could adopt when the new legislation is challenged to push back against the Executive’s undemocratic maneuvers.
Continue reading >>
Marriage Equality at the Doors of the Indian Supreme Court
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India recently heard over 20 petitions seeking marriage equality. The significance of a positive declaration cannot be overstated. It would make India only the second country in Asia to recognize LGBTQ+ marriages. As India becomes the world’s most populous country this year, a favorable decision would also mean that an estimated 17.7% of the world’s population would come under a marriage equality regime which is more than the cumulative population of the 34 countries that currently recognize such marriages (17% of the global population).
Continue reading >>
50 Years of Kesavananda Bharti
India is celebrating the 50th anniversary of the landmark Kesavananda Bharti decision this year, which concretized the ‘basic structure doctrine’. Created by the judiciary in response to an overzealous executive branch, it stipulates that the legislature cannot damage or destroy the basic features of the Constitution that are fundamental to its identity. This blogpost explains the circumstances of the doctrine's inception, its substance and controversies as well as its continued importance for Indian democracy.
Continue reading >>
Rahul Gandhi’s Disqualification and the Future of Political Opposition in India
With the general elections scheduled for early next year and several crucial state elections lined up for later this year, the ruling party’s onslaught on their opposition continues in India. The Bharatiya Janata Party (“BJP”) government has left no channel of state power unused in its crusade against opposition parties. The disqualification of Rahul Gandhi – one of the most prominent leaders of the opposition from the India National Congress (“INC”) – is another episode of the degeneration of democracy in India.
Continue reading >>
The Janus Face of Fetal Citizenship: A Tool of Inclusion or a Threat to Abortion Rights?
Should citizenship status be conferred upon an unborn child? In a 2022 landmark decision, Pranav Srinivasan v. Union of India, the Madras High Court answered this question in the affirmative. Srinivasan had not been born yet when his parents, with his mother being in the third trimester of her pregnancy, gave up their Indian for Singaporean citizenship. Now an adult and ostensibly to avoid the mandatory conscription for Singaporean citizens, Srinivasan sought to avail himself of a statutory right to reclaim his Indian citizenship, pursuant to section 8(2) of the Citizenship Act 1955. While the Court's ruling in Srinivasan's favour should be applauded for its inclusionary ethos, it threatens to undermine India's progressive abortion jurisprudence. A provision of the 1956 Hindu Succession Act might provide a solution to this conflict.
Continue reading >>
On the Road to Censorship
Freedom of expression is in peril in India. To be fair, the Indian Supreme Court has never been a devout protector of freedom of expression. When presented with the option, it has often leaned towards permitting limitations, so long as the restrictions are properly framed under the language of Article 19(2) of the constitution. Yet, faced with the current illiberal onslaught, there is a possibility that even the few gains that have been made in this area of the court’s jurisprudence will be lost. Situated in this context, this article discusses the recent ban issued by the Indian government on a BBC documentary on India’s prime minister, the jurisprudence of the Indian supreme court on the interception of online material, and the legal measures introduced to regulate freedom of expression on the internet.
Continue reading >>
The Indian Supreme Court Collegium Picking its Battle
In an unprecedented move, the collegium of the Supreme Court of India on the 17th and 18th of January, 2023, passed resolutions calling out the executive’s delay in the judicial appointments of five advocates by publicly countering the government’s objections against their appointment. In this piece, I discuss how the Supreme Court collegium has confronted the discriminatory treatment of persons who openly identify as a part of the LGBTQIA+ community in the process of judicial appointments by standing up to the executive’s bullying. The piece also looks into how the collegium has confronted the union government’s attempt to suppress dissent among advocates and why these resolutions are highly consequential.
Continue reading >>Constitutional but Criminal
In the last two years, India has witnessed significant changes in the legal regulation of abortion. In 2021, Parliament comprehensively amended the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (“MTP” Act) to ensure “access of women to safe and legal abortion without compromising on the safety and quality of care,” along with securing “dignity, autonomy, confidentiality and justice for women who need to terminate pregnancy.” Additionally, in September 2022, the Supreme Court of India delivered a path-breaking judgment on abortion, locating access to safe abortion within the fundamental rights to dignity, autonomy, privacy, and health. Despite these changes, the law and practice of abortion continue to deny pregnant persons access to safe and comprehensive abortion care.
Continue reading >>
Suppressing Political Dissent
The administrative preventive detention law Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 (PSA) is one of the most stringent laws to uphold in what is referred to as the “security of the state and the public order.” For decades, thousands of Kashmiris have been incarcerated under this law for expressing political views contrary to official state narratives. Creating a state of exception where people are not ordinary criminals but extraordinary criminals who pose a threat to the national integrity of the Indian state, the PSA has stripped countless individuals of their basic rights.
Continue reading >>
“We Know Where You Live”
"We know where you live" is one of the most dreaded and threatening statements a Kashmiri can hear from the state armed forces. It can mean a number of things to an ordinary Kashmiri, including “we have information on you” and “we are watching you”. It can also be perceived as an immediate threat to the life and safety of the person given the absolute impunity enjoyed by the state armed forces.
Continue reading >>
The Politics of Internet Shutdowns
Frequent internet shutdowns in the Indian region of Kashmir provide a valuable case study for how technology governance can become a tool of political control. The Indian government leads the world in these techniques, instituting 75 shutdowns over the course of 2022 alone. In this blog post, I argue that internet shutdowns have become a standard method for federal and state officials in India to silence those who dissent from the governing BJP agenda. The government’s repressive policies will further erode India’s democratic system unless legislators push back and create a more transparent and accountable system for technology governance in India.
Continue reading >>
Constitutional Patriotism for the Marginalized
Constitutions depict social realities, tell stories, reflect on people and culture. They are the embodiment of a state reality, matured by a national history, admonishing and guiding politics and the broader public. The Indian Constitution tells a unique story: Of combined liberalism and pluralism, of a reality of marginalization in society and of constant search for identity. Recent developments in majority-Muslim Kashmir have made these narratives more visible than ever and point to a new lens of analysis.
Continue reading >>
Kashmir in Turmoil
Kashmir is not only the object of disputes over territory between India and Pakistan as well as India and China. It also witnesses violent conflicts between the Indian security forces (which include the army and paramilitary forces) and an armed Kashmiri insurgency that seeks autonomy from the Indian nation-state. The latter conflict has escalated anew since 5 August 2019 when the BJP-led Indian government abrogated the special status that the Muslim-majority state Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) had previously enjoyed and significantly curtailed the civil liberties of people living in the region. This blog post contextualises the events of August 2019 and thereafter. At the same time, it provides an introduction and some background information to the posts assembled in this symposium titled Casting Light on Kashmir.
Continue reading >>Throwing the Delegation Doctrine to the Winds
In November 2022, the Indian Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology published the draft Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 (‘the 2022 Bill’). In this article, I analyse the 2022 Bill from a constitutional law perspective. I argue that the 2022 Bill’s provisions as to subordinate legislation fly in the face of the Indian Supreme Court’s delegation doctrine inasmuch as these provisions set no coherently determinable legislative policy, thereby allowing the Executive to exercise plenary legislative power through delegated legislation. This, I further argue, is a breach of the principle of separation of powers as it exists in Indian constitutional jurisprudence.
Continue reading >>
From Marginalization to Reproductive Justice
On 29th September 2022, a three-judge bench of the Indian Supreme Court passed its final order in a petition concerning the right to abortion for unmarried women. In a major progress for reproductive justice in India, the court decided in favour of unmarried women and recognized their equal right to access abortion. If followed, this judgment can potentially expand the wider access to sexual and reproductive health services for a range of groups. This marks a clear divide from previous approaches of the Supreme Court towards sexual and reproductive health.
Continue reading >>
Challenging Censorship
India’s online censorship laws have, since they were framed, been entirely lacking in transparency, and have consequently shielded the Indian government from any and all form of accountability. A writ petition by Twitter in an Indian High Court hopes to change that. Depending on which way the Courts rule, the fundamental rights of free expression, of due process and of access to the internet of millions of Indians are going to be decided by the end of this case.
Continue reading >>
The Rule of Law in a Reign of Terror
India is witnessing a spate of housing demolition used as a tool to inflict extrajudicial punishment for dissent. Over the past few months, the bulldozer has emerged as a powerful metaphor for the brute force of the state and the endless machinations of Hindu supremacists to flatten any difference or diversity they encounter. Tempting as it is, to think of the recent demolitions as a shocking new development, in fact the bulldozer has always been a significant determinant of the contours of space in India.
Continue reading >>The Development of Surveillance Technology in India
India has overhauled its surveillance architecture in a manner which calls into question the separation of powers and accountability mechanisms for the government. The Executive, through orders, has put into place invasive systems which do not have provisions for judicial review or oversight. This absence of oversight raises concerns about potential illegal mass surveillance, as well as the constitutionality of these systems itself.
Continue reading >>
The Hijab Ban in India has nothing to do with Secularism
In February 2022, educational institutions in the town of Udupi (in Karnataka, India) decided to ban the wearing of Hijabs by Muslim students in a college. This ban is unconstitutional. It is not in line with the principle of secularism and also violates the right to education.
Continue reading >>„Ein Angriff auf die Verfassung”
Die komplexe Verflechtung von Sicherheit und Meinungsfreiheit in Indien stellt eine ernsthafte Herausforderung für die demokratischen Ideale der Meinungsfreiheit dar. Heute erleben wir, dass Journalisten und Aktivisten im ganzen Land verstärkt ins Visier genommen werden. Insbesondere in konfliktreichen Regionen hat sich die Situation verschärft, da Journalisten beschuldigt werden, mit Staatsfeinden zu konspirieren. Die zunehmende Praxis, der Presse und den Foren der öffentlichen Debatte einen Maulkorb zu verpassen, hat in der Zivilgesellschaft eine Kultur der Angst geschaffen, die sich unmittelbar auf die Qualität der Demokratie und die Meinungsfreiheit auswirkt.
Continue reading >>
‘An assault on the constitution’
India's complex interlocking of securitization and freedom of expression poses a serious challenge to democratic ideals of free speech. Today, we witness increased targeting of journalists and activists across the country. In particular, conflict-ridden regions have presented a more serious situation where journalists face accusations of conspiring with the enemies of the state. The growing practice of muzzling the press and forums of public debate has created a culture of fear among the civil society, which directly affects the quality of democracy and free speech.
Continue reading >>
India’s Dynamic Constitution
A set of petitions challenging India’s non-recognition of gay and transgender persons’ right to marry was listed for final hearing by the Delhi High Court on 30 November 2021, with notice subsequently having been issued to the Union Government. I argue that the Indian constitutional framework is sufficiently well-developed to recognise LGBT marriage and that in holding as much, judicial fora in India would be heavily influenced by the idea of “constitutional morality”.
Continue reading >>
Irregularisierung der Staatsbürgerschaft in Indien
Indien hat komplexe rechtliche Mechanismen geschaffen, die den Status der Staatsbürgerschaft stark verunsichert haben. Diese Mechanismen erlauben es, Personen willkürlich als mutmaßliche Ausländer ins Visier zu nehmen, stellen unzumutbare Beweisanforderungen für den Nachweis der Staatsbürgerschaft und erleichtern den schleichenden Verlust materieller Rechte - und das alles ohne formellen Entzug des Staatsbürgerschaftsstatuses. Diese Prozesse lassen sich meiner Meinung nach am besten als das verstehen, was Peter Nyers als "Irregularisierung der Staatsbürgerschaft" bezeichnet.
Continue reading >>
Irregularizing Citizenship in India
India has created complex legal mechanisms that have introduced severe insecurity of citizenship status. These mechanisms permit arbitrary targeting of persons as suspected foreigners, place unreasonable evidentiary standards for proving citizenship, and facilitate creeping loss of substantive rights – all without a formal revocation of citizenship status. These processes, I suggest, are best understood as what Peter Nyers calls ‘irregularizing citizenship’.
Continue reading >>
Why don’t they just stop stopping the internet?
We cannot trust the Indian state to forego the easy option for the right option. And that’s why we need transparency and accountability on internet shutdowns. The Supreme Court recognised this when it ordered that all internet suspension orders must be made available widely, to enable affected citizens to challenge these orders in Court. In practice, the Supreme Court's orders have been ignored.
Continue reading >>
COVID-19 and the Crisis in Indian Democracy
In the recent global history of constitutional democracies, it is difficult to name a single crisis that has plagued them simultaneously, until the COVID-19 pandemic. The calamity brought in by the virus was universal. For governments, it presented an opportunity for crisis management without compromising rights guarantees. Some countries have marginally succeeded in this test while in others, concerns of democratic decline were amplified. Three features defined the Indian response to COVID-19: lack of transparency, executive monopoly and suppression of dissent.
Continue reading >>
No Court When Needed
For months, Indian farmers have been protesting against the so-called “farm bills”. With the government unwilling to give in to demands and with farmers determined to keep on protesting until the laws are repealed, India’s Supreme Court has ventured into the political fray. On 12th January it passed an order staying the laws as well as setting up a mediation committee. The Supreme Court’s response fits neatly into a destructive pattern, particularly in the past years under the Modi government, in which it has abnegated its core functions in favor of politically expedient (in-)actions.
Continue reading >>
Abusing Parliamentary Procedures
Unlike the post-world-war era, democracies are no longer subverted via coups. Would-be autocrats pursue anti-democratic agendas through laws to imbue them with a veneer of legitimacy. This renaissance in authoritarianism has thrown into focus the institution of the legislature, which becomes the primary site for what Javier Corrales terms ‘Autocratic Legalism’. India is no stranger to the trend of Autocratic Legalism, and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (“BJP”) has often taken the aid of the presiding officers in both Houses of the Parliament, to push forward its anti-democratic agendas. Considering how central a role presiding officers have played in eroding democracy inIndia, a radical shakeup to the way presiding officers are appointed and function is needed to ensure Indian democracy’s long-term sustainability.
Continue reading >>No Country for Dissent
On July 25, Twitter ‘withheld’ or disabled access to two tweets made by activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan. Prashant Bhushan had posted two tweets in the end of June, criticizing the Supreme Court and especially its current Chief Justice. Based on the Tweets, the Supreme Court initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against Bhushan on July 21 and Twitter’s withdrawal comes two days after the first hearing in the case.
Continue reading >>
The Celebration of Extra-Judicial Murders: Who’s Watching India?
Police killing and brutality have become common news in India lately, with various cases where citizens were beaten, and even killed, on account of trivial violations of the nationwide COVID-lockdown. Instead of using its resources and manpower to gather evidence and bring the accused to trial, the police in India seems to prefer the easy way of extra-judicial killings. The incidents of these killings on the very face of it seem fabricated, as eerily similar narratives are given. Since the draconian Indian Criminal Procedure Code allows the police to fatally injure a person ‘forcibly’ resisting or evading arrest, if he is accused of an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment, most of these narratives include the accused trying to evade the police or firing at it. Such killings with deliberately concocted circumstances, are in common parlance termed as ‘fake encounter’.
Continue reading >>
From Legal Fiction to Reality: Securing the Dignity of India’s Manual Scavengers
Manual scavenging is one of the most inhumane and abhorrent sanitation practices prevalent in modern India: broadly, it means deploying individuals to manually clean up drainage systems. ‘Manual scavengers’ (unfortunately, for the lack of a better term) have been denied their humanitarian due for centuries in the Indian sub-continent and their constitutional due for 70 years in the Republic of India – it is high time the Law dismantles the structure that perpetuates their oppression.
Continue reading >>
Cracks in India’s Constitutional Framework
India's constitutional system was conceptualized to share power (although not equally) between the Union and the 29 states alongside an institutionally grounded system of checks and balances between the parliament, the executive and the judiciary. As the world’s largest democracy proceeds into the sixth week of the nation-wide lockdown to address the outbreak of Covid-19, certain cracks in its constitutional framework have been exacerbated that have the potential to structurally alter the constitutional framework of checks and balances in the aftermath of the pandemic.
Continue reading >>
The Delhi Killings and the Making of Violence
The recent killings in Delhi, orchestrated by armed mobs with impunity and legitimized through the highest offices of government and the current ruling party, resulted in the death of almost 50 people, mostly Muslims and mostly the poor and vulnerable among them. The sheer scale, design and brutality of the undertaking revived memories of the 2002 Gujarat riots and the 1984 riots in Delhi, that exhibited a certain pattern. That of absolute unrestraint and complicity. Of the state, the executive, the police, the popular media and in many respects the courts as well, in creating and perpetuating a state of terror while fuelling discrimination and disenfranchisement against minorities, especially Muslims.
Continue reading >>Kashmir: A Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy
On 10 January 2020, the Indian Supreme Court delivered its verdict on the ongoing internet shutdown in Kashmir. While the Court did reprimand the government to some extent, at the time of this writing Kashmir is still cut off from the internet. Anyone who had banked on the Supreme Court to make good on the promise of fundamental rights will be disheartened.
Continue reading >>
European Solidarity Statement with Academics and Students in India
We are students, scholars, and academics at European universities who […]
Continue reading >>
Citizenship by Religion
India is presently witnessing a country-wide mass uprising against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, which purposefully aims to grant migrants belonging to six enlisted communities an easy path to Indian citizenship, while denying the same to others – notably Muslims. This Act is unconstitutional as it exploits deliberate omissions on citizenship rules in the constitution while it ignores the constitutional design which is fundamentally based on equality and secularism.
Continue reading >>
Constitutional Exceptionalism in Kashmir
The move of India's President to abrogate Article 370 has been subject to much academic debate and discourse along the doctrinaire lines and limits of traditional constitutional law. Since the Declaration was passed, however, in a state of exception, the consequent legal vacuum necessitates an analysis in light of both political facts and public law.
Continue reading >>Miller/Cherry 2 Goes to Kashmir
There are certain principles which emerge from Miller/Cherry 2 which are meaningful for cases involving judicial review of executive powers. The application of these principles, especially in cases where the line between the executive and legislature is thin (resulting in what Bagehot described as the ‘fusion of powers’), can guide comparative lawyers to hitherto underexplored areas of administrative law accountability of the executive to legislative bodies.
Continue reading >>
When the Judiciary Undermines Judicial Independence
India’s Supreme Court has long sought to protect itself, mostly through an insulated appointment system, from political pressures. Judicial independence seems to be the catchphrase for the Indian Judiciary when it is under pressure or attack. But how far has the Court been successful in navigating and managing the problems caused by judicial hierarchies and politics within its very own walls?
Continue reading >>
Staatenlos in Assam
In ihrer Heimat gelten sie ab sofort als illegale Einwanderer. Das Land, in das sie ausgewiesen werden sollen, versinkt langsam unter dem steigenden Meeresspiegel. Fast zwei Millionen Menschen, die im indischen Bundesstaat Assam leben, gelten aufgrund der Veröffentlichung eines Nationalen Bürgerregisters durch die indische Zentralregierung seit dem 31. August 2019 als illegale Einwanderer aus Bangladesch. Tatsächlich gelten die Betroffenen bereits jetzt als Staatenlose. Den Menschen droht eine Situation rechtlicher und territorialer Bodenlosigkeit – verloren zwischen nationalem Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht und internationaler Verantwortungslosigkeit.
Continue reading >>
Article 370: Is it a Basic Feature of the Indian Constitution?
The move of India’s Government to nullify Article 370 of the Constitution not only broadened the legislative powers of the Union Parliament over the Jammu & Kashmir but also demoted J&K to the position of a Union Territory. Apart from doubts about the Government's power to bring about these changes and their legitimacy, it is an open question whether Article 370 is a basic feature of the Constitution of India. Given the sacrosanct political arrangement it encapsulates as well as its role as an exemplar of Indian federal asymmetry, it is now upon the Supreme Court to formally acknowledge the constitutional basis of India’s delicate distribution of powers.
Continue reading >>The Constitutional Siege on Article 370
On August 5, India revoked Article 370, a controversial provision in the Indian Constitution, which happened to be the only link between the State of Jammu & Kashmir and the Indian Union. After its revocation, the Union parliament passed a bill to reorganise the State into two federally administered Union Territories, a move which some have labelled as “illegal occupation” of the State.
Continue reading >>Of Constitutional Subterfuge and the ‘Integration’ of Kashmir
In what was nothing short of a Constitutional heist, the Indian government has effectively extended the entirety of the Indian Constitution to the state of Kashmir.
Continue reading >>“Twenty Years of Selfless Service”: The Unmaking of India’s Chief Justice
India's Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi has been accused by a former staffer of sexual harassment. In a glaring transgression of judicial procedure, Gogoi staged a 23-minute suo motu hearing, in which he presided over a bench made up of Justices Arun Mishra and Sanjiv Khanna. Gogoi feels justified to adjudicate his own case because of extraordinary circumstances.
Continue reading >>To Catch a Spy: India v. Pakistan at the ICJ
Does the right to consular access also apply to imprisoned spies abroad? The International Court of Justice in The Hague will decide.
Continue reading >>
Indian Democracy at a Crossroads
The Indian Supreme Court's ruling on LGBTQ rights signals a court willing to play an unabashedly partisan role in the ongoing battle over the idea of India. The Indian Supreme Court, however, remains a complicated, polyvocal, court, and cannot be attributed any coherent ideological or jurisprudential worldview. This, at a time when the defining role of inclusive pluralism to India’s constitutional identity is at stake and majoritarian nationalism is waging a spirited battle, not just for continued political relevance but for reshaping the very idea of India.
Continue reading >>
Independence Day: Das Urteil des indischen Obersten Gerichtshofs zum “Sodomie-Gesetz”
Am 6. September 2018 erklärte der indische Oberste Gerichtshof das sogenannte „Sodomie-Gesetz“, das u.a. den Analverkehr zwischen Männern unter Strafe stellte, für verfassungswidrig. Dabei verwiesen die Richter auf den transformativen Charakter der indischen Verfassung und die ihr innewohnende "konstitutionelle Moral". Die Entscheidung fügt sich ein in eine breitere Bewegung in den Commonwealth-Staaten, die sich für die Aufhebung der Kriminalisierung von Homosexualität stark macht und die von den Obersten Gerichtshöfen ausgeht. Die vorliegende Entscheidung dürfte dieser Bewegung neuen Schwung geben.
Continue reading >>
Decriminalising Homosexuality in India as a Matter of Transformative Constitutionalism
What worth is a Constitution if it does not seek out the emancipation of a society’s most marginalized and excluded? Indeed, what vision ought a Constitution espouse if it isn’t a commitment to basic fundamental rights and freedoms? Ultimately, what polity must a Constitution nurture if it isn’t towards imbibing the widest and most deepest sense of inclusion and pluralism in society? All these searching questions and much more came to form a distinct part of the decision of the Indian Supreme Court (Court) when it was called upon to rule on the constitutional validly of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Continue reading >>Zwischen Supreme Court und Zentralregierung: Zur drohenden Staatenlosigkeit der muslimischen Minderheit in Assam
Ende Juli hat die Zentralregierung in Delhi ein neues Bürgerregister für den Bundesstaat Assam veröffentlicht, in welchem sich nicht alle Einwohner des indischen Bundesstaates wiederfinden. Ein Großteil derer, die auf der Liste fehlen, gehört der muslimischen Minderheit an. Ihnen droht die Festsetzung in Camps, der Entzug politischer Rechte, Abschiebung oder gar Staatenlosigkeit. Der Fall, dessen Historie bis in die Zeit der Unabhängigkeitsbewegungen zurückreicht, zeigt, dass gegenwärtig in Indien Ressentiments gegen ursprünglich Geflüchtete einer bestimmten religiösen Minderheit wieder aufleben und rechtlich verfestigt werden.
Continue reading >>
Being Gay under India’s Constitution
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code penzalizes "carnal intercourse against the order of nature". The Indian Supreme Court heard a case last week that could finally lead to the end of this residue of British colonial rule.
Continue reading >>Save the Constitution!
India's oppositional Congress party wants to impeach Dipak Misra, the Chief Justice of India, who stands accused of allocating cases to the respective benches at his own, politically right-leaning whim. In its fight against the governing BJP party, the Congress party has launched a "Save the Constitution!" campaign. Unfortunately, its leader Rahul Ghandi's family has a history of entanglement with the constitution of its own.
Continue reading >>
Sunshine through the Rain: New Hope for Decriminalization of Gay Sex in India?
Gay sex is still a criminal act according to the Indian Penal Act. In 2013, the Supreme Court had quashed a judgment by a Delhi Court to decriminalise consensual gay sex. Now, there are signs that the Supreme Court might reconsider.
Continue reading >>
Four Indian Supreme Court Judges Accuse the Chief Justice of Wrongdoing
The judges should have been more considerate towards the institutional damage their actions have caused. They have hurt the court for decades to come. Institutional reform proves healthy when it comes from the inside; and one would like to think, that four senior judges wield a hefty amount of institutional power to transform the procedural mechanism without having to 'call upon the people' to intervene.This was little more than a political act in a country where politics and the law only function along the simple logic of institutionalising antagonism.
Continue reading >>
Reconciling Religion: Lessons Learned from the Triple Talaq Case for Comparative Constitutional Governance
The recent case of Shayara Bano v Union of India heard before the Supreme Court of India provide helpful guidance for how a secular democratic regime with a multiplicity of religious, ethnic, and cultural communities can manage constitutional governance with an increasing number of seemingly irreconcilable tensions. Pluralist societies such as Canada and the United States grapple with a variety of delicate balancing acts: in such instance, the need to reconcile accommodation for religious and cultural minorities with the protection of gender rights on the other.
Continue reading >>
Privacy and the Indian Supreme Court
The Indian Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on the "Aadhar" biometric identification scheme is an important step to prepare India for the digital age and offers fresh impulses for a public debate on the legal contours of privacy.
Continue reading >>How not to Divorce Muslim Women in India
The Supreme Court of India has declared the Muslim practice of men divorcing their wife by repeating the word "talaq" three times unconstitutional.
Continue reading >>Triple Talaq before the Indian Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of India has to decide a case that has captured India’s political, constitutional and social imagination – a challenge to the constitutional validity of triple talaq, a practice that allows a Muslim man to divorce his wife unilaterally simply by uttering the word “talaq” thrice.
Continue reading >>How Old is 14 Really? On Child Marriage and Case-by-Case Justice
A bizarrely archaic hiccup for old-school historicists, curiously ambivalent and legally intriguing to others, child marriages currently enjoy an unforeseen centrality in Germany’s public life. Europe today is hard pressed to look beyond its shores for instructive twenty-first century survival scripts. India’s past offers some lessons on child marriages for the current German predicament.
Continue reading >>Dürfen Richter gleichgeschlechtlichen Sex legalisieren?
Indiens Strafgesetzbuch droht Männern und Frauen für “carnal intercourse against […]
Continue reading >>A Note On Rape
In a recent popular bollywood jingle Sheila ki jawani (easily […]
Continue reading >>
