This opinion was published in The Hindu on May 26, 2016.
About the Authors
Arghya is the Founder and Research Director at Vidhi. His areas of specialisation are constitutional law and regulation of the digital economy. He has served on a number of government committees including the B.N. Srikrishna-led committee of experts on a data protection framework for India. Arghya has a number of academic publications on the Supreme Court and the Constitution in leading law journals such as Law Quarterly Review and Public Law. He is also a columnist at The Telegraph and The Times of India. He has most recently authored a book “Independence and Accountability of the Indian Higher Judiciary” (Cambridge, 2019) which builds on his doctoral work at Oxford University. Prior to founding Vidhi, he was at Oxford as a Lecturer in Administrative Law at Pembroke College.
Munawar Faruqui’s Bail Process Flouted Set Judicial Precedents in Five Judgments
We Must Continue to Question
South Africa’s Duncanmec Case and the Judgment on Racism in the Workplace
The judgment has far-reaching consequences in the type of post-apartheid society that the Constitutional Court is shaping for South Africa.
What constitutes hate speech? What the South African Constitutional Court decreed in the 2018 Duncanmec case
Part 3 of the ‘Free to Air’ seriesPrivacy & Cookies Policy
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.