In the last ten years, two landmark judgments in India are: Aadhaar Judgment (2018): In the Puttaswamy judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The court also held that the Aadhaar scheme, a biometricRead more
In the last ten years, two landmark judgments in India are:
- Aadhaar Judgment (2018): In the Puttaswamy judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The court also held that the Aadhaar scheme, a biometric identification program, is constitutional but only if it meets certain conditions, including the requirement of consent and the data must be used for the purpose it was collected.
- Sabarimala Verdict (2018): In the Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India lifted the ban on women’s entry into the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala, allowing women of all ages to worship at the temple. The court ruled that this restriction was unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 (equality) and Article 25 (freedom of conscience) of the Indian Constitution.
Now, about the NOTA Judgment in 2013:
NOTA Judgement (2013): In 2013, the Supreme Court of India ruled in the case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India that a voter has the right to exercise a “None of the Above” (NOTA) option in an election. This option allows voters to choose NOTA if they are dissatisfied with all the candidates contesting an election. The court held that this option is essential for democratic governance and would help to ensure that voters are not forced to vote for a candidate they do not want.
The NOTA option was introduced by the Election Commission of India through an amendment to Rule 49(0) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, in January 2013. The option is available to all electors, except those who are voting by postal ballot or proxy.
See less
The new criminal laws in India, encapsulated in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), introduce several significant changes:The new criminal laws in India, encapsulated in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya NagaRead more
The new criminal laws in India, encapsulated in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), introduce several significant changes:The new criminal laws in India, encapsulated in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), introduce several significant changes:
### Major Changes
1. **Simplification and Modernization**: The above new laws relate to the attempts to streamline the legal environment, deregulate it and make appropriate adjustments to the current legislation.
2. **Victim-Centered Approach**: Deeper commitment to the rights and assistance for victims as well as their compensation.
3. **Witness Protection**: Better protection laws for the witnesses so that the witnesses could be trusted and could provide their statements safely.
4. **Digitization and Efficiency**: Higher use of digital workflow and shorter time of case handling.
5. **Revised Penal Provisions**: New descriptions and severity of penalties on different offences as well as new classes of criminal activities.
6. **Abolition of Archaic Laws**: As the slavish imitations of the colonial structure are no longer appropriate for the modern societies, many sections of laws containing colonial relics are undergoing change on social grounds.
### Major Controversies
1. **Implementation Challenges**: Fears regarding the applicability of the new laws pres on the current existing structures and resource available in implementing centers.
2. **Potential for Misuse**: Concerns are raised over the abuse of provisions and it is again the national security and public order section that draws much criticism.
3. **Privacy Concerns**: The provisions concerning surveillance and data collection contribute to the privacy concerns and ideas of state intrusion.
4. **Ambiguity and Interpretation**: Some provisions are considered vague to the extent that different actions may be taken on them and therefore may be violated or enforced differently.
5. **Adequate Training**: Overcoming probable shortcoming in implementing the new laws and ensuring that members of the law enforcement agencies and judicial systems are properly equipped to implement the laws.
It is clear that the new criminal laws have tried to introduce a more efficient and fair justice system, but the problem is with the methods used in implementing them, misunderstanding in perverting them into the opposite of what they are intended to be, and offences against the right to privacy.
See less