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 aus