Symposium - Interpreting Equality Rights in India's Constitution: the Manifest Arbitrariness Test

Symposium - Interpreting Equality Rights in India's Constitution: the Manifest Arbitrariness Test

Vanshaj Jain

The content of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which protects the right to equality, has been subject to much debate over the years. However the decision in Navtej Johar v. Union of India will play a decisive role in determining the interpretation to be accorded to this provision, as it substantially enhances the reach of Article 14 by affirming the ‘manifest arbitrariness’ test.  

Read More

Symposium - "Asking Searching Questions to Forms and Symbols of Injustice”: Indirect Discrimination, Intersectionality and the Principle of Anti-Stereotyping

Symposium - "Asking Searching Questions to Forms and Symbols of Injustice”: Indirect Discrimination, Intersectionality and the Principle of Anti-Stereotyping


Akshat Agarwal

The Supreme Court of India’s (Supreme Court) decriminalisation of same-sex relationships in Navtej Johar v. Union of India (Navtej Johar) was a culmination of the almost two-decade long, bruising legal struggle for LGBT+ rights in India, which saw the earliest petitions being filed in 2001 and decriminalisation by the Delhi High Court in Naz Foundation in 2009, followed by the Supreme Courts’s re-criminalisation in Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation in 2013.

Read More

Symposium - A Constitutionalism of Decolonization: Thoughts on Navtej Johar v. Union of India

Symposium - A Constitutionalism of Decolonization: Thoughts on Navtej Johar v. Union of India

Aradhya Sethia

Section 377, first enacted in 1860 in British India, was later exported to several erstwhile British colonies. “377” has become a symbol of anti-sodomy laws across Commonwealth countries. The provision has survived in India, like many other jurisdictions, despite anti-colonial movements and a subsequent constitutional democracy. As Douglas Sanders argues, this provision epitomizes, in many ways, the “afterlife of British colonialism in Asia.”

Read More

Symposium - Guest Editor's Introduction: 'Section 377: The Indian Supreme Court's Expanding LGBT Rights Jurisprudence'

Symposium - Guest Editor's Introduction: 'Section 377: The Indian Supreme Court's Expanding LGBT Rights Jurisprudence'

GUEST EDITOR | Aradhya Sethia

On 6 September 2018, in Navtej Johar v. Union of India, a five-judge bench of the Indian Supreme Court partially struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.” The Court unanimously declared that criminalization of any consensual sexual relationship between two adults violates the rights to equality, freedom of expression, and privacy. The decision makes momentous advances in Indian fundamental rights jurisprudence, which will be of significant interest to comparative constitutional law scholars.

Read More

In Search of a Viable Federalism: the Federal Character Principle in the Nigerian Constitution

In Search of a Viable Federalism: the Federal Character Principle in the Nigerian Constitution

Iyabode Ogunniran

Nigeria adopted the federal system of government after independence in 1960 to assuage the feelings of the over 200 ethnic minorities. To provide further a sense of belonging the 'Federal Character Principle' was inserted into the 1979 Constitution. It is over three decades, has the principle promoted peace, stability, sharing of power and resources amongst the states?  

Read More

Judicial Review, Evidence, and Systemic Unfairness in the UK

Judicial Review, Evidence, and Systemic Unfairness in the UK

Joe Tomlinson & Katy Sheridan

Reading practitioner and academic texts on judicial review in the UK (with a few exceptions aside), it would be very easy to get the impression that the detailed assessment of evidence is no part—or at least not an important part—of judicial review. The long-favoured practitioner treatise—de Smith’s Judicial Review—only makes passing mention of evidence in a text which runs 1098 pages.

Read More

Between a Rock and a Sacred Place: the Limits of Aboriginal Rights and Freedom of Religion in Ktunaxa v BC (2017)

Between a Rock and a Sacred Place: the Limits of Aboriginal Rights and Freedom of Religion in Ktunaxa v BC (2017)

Kirsten Anker

Indigenous peoples in Canada have long protected their territories: historically through treaties and armed conflict; now, through the courts, negotiated settlements and direct action. The constraints on doing so are multiple: the burdens of proving activities on the land in the distant past, issues of capacity, policies of extinguishment, a hard-headed bargaining stance on behalf of provincial and federal governments, and the criminalization of protest.

Read More

Part II: 2018 Elections in Turkey: What Did Change?

Part II: 2018 Elections in Turkey: What Did Change?

Selin Esen

Editors' Note: This is the second part of a two part post discussing the impact of the recent Presidential and Parliamentary elections in Turkey.

Firstly, Turkey has been under a state of emergency since July 2016. Since then, the government extended the emergency regime for consecutively seven times, each time for three months. The last prolongation was adopted by the Parliament shortly before the elections. This indicates a clear intention of the government to hold elections under extraordinary conditions.

Read More

Part II: The Uncertain Application of the EU Withdrawal Act 2018. From the Great Repeal to the Contingency Plan

Part II: The Uncertain Application of the EU Withdrawal Act 2018. From the Great Repeal to the Contingency Plan

Marta Simoncini

As analysed in the first Part of this Post, the EU Withdrawal Act 2018 offered a hard response to the repeal of EU law, while recognising some leeway to adjust the great repeal operation to the specificities of individual sectors and wider policy needs. This second Part will focus on the apparent revision of that strategy in light of the possible Withdrawal Agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union.

Read More