Search

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.

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.

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.

Having been governed by Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for the last ten years, India will hold elections in the following weeks. We use this moment as an opportunity to reflect upon the last decade and assess how the Hindu nationalists have impacted Indian constitutionalism. To do so, we have asked legal scholars and practitioners to reflect upon the developments in particular areas of Indian constitutional law over the last decade. This blog post will provide an introduction to the symposium.

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.

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.

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.

The Economics Department at India’s Ashoka University received an unexpected visit from the Federal Intelligence Bureau. The reason for this visit was a paper titled ‘Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy’ by Sabyasachi Das, an economist. In his research, Das meticulously examined 11 contested seats during India’s 2019 general elections and uncovered imbalanced outcomes that favored the ruling party, BJP. Das noted that ‘the results point to strategic and targeted electoral discrimination against Muslims, in the form of deletion of names from voter lists and suppression of their votes during election, in part facilitated by weak monitoring by election observers.’ The subsequent visit by the Federal Intelligence Bureau is just one among several incidents that highlight the precarious state of academic freedom in India.

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.

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.

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.

Why do financial crises appear unprecedented in spite of being a rather regular occurrence across countries and time? There are many answers from various schools of finance and economics, including Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis in which systemic stability endogenously results in instability. We explore the inclusion of observed human behavior in an endogenous framework by engaging with anthropological concepts such as myth, ritual and magic that structure and explain our behaviour, and by extending the concept of agency from human to non-human. We also point to the possibility of better understanding our position in the mythological cycle using the new social media data. The aim of the article is to offer a holistic framework of interpretation of causes and circumstances of economic crises, using the tools of economy, semiotics, and economic anthropology that would account for both the universality of these crises and for their particular occurrences that always seem unique.

Copyright of Elektronik Industrie is the property of Hüthig GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)