In the backdrop of the Korean War, explain how the war mediation was a test of India’s commitment to the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).
Administrative law and constitutional law are two distinct areas of law that serve different purposes. Administrative law focuses on the rules and regulations that govern the daily work of government agencies and public officials. It ensures that they act fairly, follow procedures, and don't abuse tRead more
Administrative law and constitutional law are two distinct areas of law that serve different purposes.
Administrative law focuses on the rules and regulations that govern the daily work of government agencies and public officials. It ensures that they act fairly, follow procedures, and don’t abuse their power.
Constitutional law, on the other hand, deals with the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, as enshrined in the Constitution. It sets limits on government power and protects individual liberties.
Let’s consider a case study:
In the landmark case of “Marbury v. Madison” (1803), the US Supreme Court established the principle of judicial review, which allows courts to strike down government actions that violate the Constitution. This case demonstrated the difference between administrative law and constitutional law. The Court was not reviewing an administrative decision, but rather ensuring that the government’s action aligned with the Constitution.
In simple terms, administrative law is like a “rule book” for government officials, while constitutional law is like a “bill of rights” that protects citizens from government overreach.
See less
The Korean War (1950-1953) tested India's commitment to the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), a policy of not aligning with any major power blocs. India, under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, pursued a diplomatic and neutral stance, emphasizing peaceful resolution and avoiding militaryRead more
The Korean War (1950-1953) tested India’s commitment to the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), a policy of not aligning with any major power blocs. India, under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, pursued a diplomatic and neutral stance, emphasizing peaceful resolution and avoiding military alliances. India led efforts in the United Nations to mediate the conflict, advocating for ceasefire and negotiations between North and South Korea.
India’s role in the Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission, overseeing the exchange of prisoners of war, highlighted its impartial approach. Despite pressure from both the United States and the Soviet Union, India maintained its neutral stance, focusing on humanitarian aid and peacekeeping. This demonstrated India’s dedication to NAM principles, prioritizing peace and sovereignty over aligning with either superpower, thus reinforcing its identity as a leader in the movement and a proponent of global peace and stability.
See less