replug: if electoral mandates don't turn on Government playing by the rules, it has no incentive to abide by the Constitution.
my piece for Constitution Day on why we need to watch the Government's every move like hawks if we care about the Constitution.
On the judgment in the Sabarimala review petitions, for The Hindu: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-revival-of-battles-already-fought-and-lost/article30099889.ece
I'll be speaking at National Law School, Bangalore, tomorrow (28 Nov.) at 3 pm on the Supreme Court and its recent decisions. It's open to all: https://www.nls.ac.in/the-nls-public-lecture-series-the-supreme-court-today-mostly-final-but-rarely-infallible-by-suhrith-parthasarathy/
AG Noorani on the Ayodhya verdict
A compilation of articles analyzing the troubled term of #CJIRanjanGogoi, who retired yesterday.
1. "CJI Gogoi Was to Be ‘A New Hope’, That’s Not How Things Panned Out"
Vakasha Sachdev @VakashaS writes in @thequint
Here it is.
“A little brief authority”: Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and the Rise of the Executive Court --
A piece on CJI Gogoi’s term: https://www.bloombergquint.com/opinion/chief-justice-ranjan-gogois-turbulent-tenure
1. Okay, here is a brief thread on Chile. As you know, there have been widespread protests in recent days, driven primarily by economic inequality (Chile is one of the most unequal countries in the world). Counter-intuitively, at the root of this inequality is the Chilean Constitution. The Constitution was drafted in 1980, as part of a transition from military to civil rule.
In The Hindu today, a piece by @gautambhatia and me on the Ayodhya ruling: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/peace-bought-by-an-unequal-compromise/article29975254.ece
" There is a crucial distinction between resolving a dispute on the basis of principle, and achieving "peace" simply by endorsing the existing balance of power - or by not proving the strong"
@suhrith and I wrote a piece on the Ayodhya judgment.
We asked if the judgment is legally correct; and if isn't, whether it is nonetheless justified as an act of "judicial statesmanship" that lets the country move on.
We believe that the answer to both those questions is "no".
What can’t issues with respect to other matters be decided based on the verdict in the Sabarimala case? A review petition can be entertained only if there’s a palpable error in the judgment. The reference to the 7-judge bench is, by any account, entirely unjustified.
Just finished reading Madhuri Vijay’s The Far Field, a dazzling debut novel. Read this review by Somak Ghoshal: https://www.livemint.com/mint-lounge/features/the-kashmir-book-we-all-must-read-11573110765743.html
New blog post: Constitutional Silences, Balancing of Rights, and the Concept of a “Neutralising Device” [Guest Post]
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!