{
"authors": [
"Suyash Rai",
"Anirudh Burman"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie India"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [
"Political Economy"
],
"regions": [
"India",
"South Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Domestic Politics",
"Democracy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In recent years, some of the most dramatic situations in Indian public life have arisen in the higher judiciary—an arm of the state ideally characterized by collegiality, scholarship, predictability, and remoteness from raucous politics.
Source: Print
In recent years, some of the most dramatic situations in Indian public life have arisen in the higher judiciary – an arm of the state ideally characterised by collegiality, scholarship, predictability, and remoteness from raucous politics.
From the disregard of principles of natural justice and public squabbling among the judges to the politically consequential activism around the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and unpredictable reasoning in judgments (treatment of money bill argument in the Aadhaar case, and ignoring of evidence of low fatalities in the liquor ban case), the reality of the higher judiciary is increasingly divergent from the ideal conception. These situations also remind us how difficult it is to hold the higher judiciary accountable.
Former Fellow, Carnegie India
Suyash Rai was a fellow at Carnegie India. His research focuses on the political economy of economic reforms, and the performance of public institutions in India.
Former Associate Research Director and Fellow, Carnegie India
Anirudh Burman was an associate research director and fellow at Carnegie India. He works on key issues relating to public institutions, public administration, the administrative and regulatory state, and state capacity.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
Talankin and Borenstein’s documentary is a unique inside look at a regime that threatens the world and has killed thousands of people in its neighboring country. And many critics and general viewers alike draw parallels between the Putin regime and their own governments.
Ekaterina Barabash
The history of Telegram’s relations with the Russian state offers a salutary lesson for international platforms that believe they can reach a compromise with the Kremlin.
Maria Kolomychenko
Kazakhstan’s new constitution is an embodiment of the ruling elite’s fears and a self-serving attempt to preserve the status quo while they still can.
Serik Beysembaev
It’s disingenuous to criticize a film for simplifying Russia’s complexities when Russia is waging a brutally simple war of aggression against its neighbor.
Alexander Baunov
The current U.S. indifference to human rights means Astana no longer has any incentive to refuse extradition requests from its authoritarian neighbors—including Russia.
Temur Umarov