Articles by Alok Prasanna Kumar

.

The press conference organised by four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court was a result of a long period of dissatisfaction over the way the institution was functioning. The problems are systemic and will require more than a short-term fix. The Supreme Court and the judiciary’s credibility have taken a battering over the last decade for many reasons, and the press conference is an acknowledgement to some extent of the rot within. What happens next is not very clear, but the status quo cannot continue.

The Supreme Court’s judgment in K Puttaswamy v Union of India (2017) presents a paradigm shift in the Court’s understanding of fundamental rights under the Constitution.

Two recent decisions, one administrative and one judicial, have given hope that the judiciary has finally accepted how non-transparent and unaccountable its functioning has become. The decision to make collegium resolutions public and the judgment to streamline designations of “senior advocates” are necessary first steps towards the larger goal of transparency in the judiciary. Both instances highlight the need for the bar and advocates to speak up for the institution and on behalf of the larger public interest.

The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016, introduced ostensibly to provide a legal framework for surrogacy in India, is a regressive legislation that seeks to control women’s bodies and reinforces heteronormative notions of what a family is. By limiting surrogacy to “altruistic surrogacy” only, it creates space for women being pressured to bear children for family members. The Rajya Sabha standing committee’s report, having heard a wide cross section of society on this matter, has rightly criticised this bill and called for its redrafting.