27 July 2020
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 >>
0 
13 January 2020
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 >>
0
08 October 2019
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 >>
0
22 April 2019
“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 >>22 October 2018
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 >>
0
09 September 2018
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 >>15 July 2018
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 >>24 January 2018
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 >>
0
18 January 2018
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 >>
0
10 September 2017
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 >>
0