LIJDLR

Volume IV Issue I

RULE-MAKING POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN THE PHILIPPINES: A DOCTRINAL REASSESSMENT IN THE CONTEMPORARY REGULATORY STATE

Volume IV Issue I /

RULE-MAKING POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN THE PHILIPPINES: A DOCTRINAL REASSESSMENT IN THE CONTEMPORARY REGULATORY STATE Darren Javier Gonzales, Associate Dean, John Wesley School of Law and Governance, Wesleyan University-Philippines Reena Clarisse Aviñante Carlos, Associate Professor, John Wesley School of Law and Governance, Wesleyan University-Philippines Lyndon John Santiago De Leon, Associate Professor, John Wesley School of Law and Governance, Wesleyan University-Philippines Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.05 Administrative agencies occupy a central position in contemporary governance, exercising extensive rule-making authority that significantly shapes rights, obligations, and regulatory outcomes. In the Philippines, this authority derives from legislative delegation and is constitutionally constrained by the principle that legislative power is vested in Congress. This Article undertakes a comprehensive doctrinal reassessment of the quasi-legislative, or rulemaking, powers of administrative agencies in the Philippine legal system. Anchored on the 1987 Constitution, the Administrative Code of 1987, and authoritative Supreme Court jurisprudence, the Article examines the constitutional foundations, evolution, scope, and limits of delegated administrative rulemaking. Particular emphasis is placed on the non-delegation doctrine and its judicial articulation through the completeness and sufficient-standard tests as mechanisms for preserving legislative supremacy while accommodating the functional necessities of administrative governance. The Article further analyzes substantive and procedural constraints on administrative regulations, including the ultra vires doctrine, the categorical prohibition against administrative penal legislation, publication requirements grounded in due process, and the standards governing judicial review of administrative rules. It highlights the Supreme Court’s calibrated approach to administrative deference, which accords respect to technical expertise while applying heightened scrutiny where regulations impose penal consequences or implicate fundamental rights. Situating Philippine doctrine within a comparative administrative law framework, the Article draws descriptive insights from the United States and the United Kingdom as mature regulatory systems confronting similar tensions between delegation and accountability. It argues that while Philippine administrative law reflects a coherent constitutional framework, it remains under-theorized in light of the expanding regulatory state. Greater doctrinal synthesis and clearer judicial articulation are therefore necessary to sustain the constitutional legitimacy of administrative rulemaking in the Philippines.

RULE-MAKING POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN THE PHILIPPINES: A DOCTRINAL REASSESSMENT IN THE CONTEMPORARY REGULATORY STATE Read More »

A COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE OF TRANSGENDER EQUITY IN EDUCATION ACROSS CONTINENTS

Volume IV Issue I /

A COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE OF TRANSGENDER EQUITY IN EDUCATION ACROSS CONTINENTS Ms. Anshika Vats, Research Scholar, School of Law, ITM University, Raipur (India) Dr. Shivli Shrivastava, Assistant Professor, School of Law, ITM University, Raipur (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.04 This article offers a comprehensive comparative analysis of legal frameworks governing gender-inclusive education, focusing on India, Argentina, the United States, Canada. It begins by examining India’s landmark NALSA v. Union of India (2014) judgment, which legally recognized transgender individuals as a “third gender” and affirmed their rights to education, and reservation benefits under Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 further institutionalized safeguards—but practical challenges persist in the form of limited infrastructure, administrative burdens in identity recognition, and persistent societal stigma. Argentina’s 2012 Gender Identity Law offers a proactive model, permitting self-identification and facilitating legal and medical recognition of transgender persons without prior medical interventions, supported by accessible healthcare coverage.  In the US, Title IX serves as the primary prohibition against sex-based discrimination in federally funded education, and its application to gender identity has seen fluctuating policy positions, recently affected by federal court rulings and legislative amendments. Through thematic cross-country comparison, this article identifies key best practices while highlighting existing enforcement gaps and the need for societal education. The study concludes with a set of recommendations for policymakers to foster inclusive education systems.

A COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE OF TRANSGENDER EQUITY IN EDUCATION ACROSS CONTINENTS Read More »

THE COLLISION BETWEEN LAW AND POWER: SADDAM HUSSEIN AND THE IMPLEMENTATION DICHOTOMY OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

Volume IV Issue I /

THE COLLISION BETWEEN LAW AND POWER: SADDAM HUSSEIN AND THE IMPLEMENTATION DICHOTOMY OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW Manish Majumder, BBA.LLB/4th Year/8th Semester Student at Department of law, University of Engineering and Management, Kolkata, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.03 Saddam Hussein’s case remains a milestone in today’s development of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), alongside International Criminal Law. His political and military activities, from the Iraq-Iran war, persecuting the Kurds through the Anfal Campaign, up to annexing Kuwait, underlined the deficiency of international instruments designed to impede aggression by states and protecting civilians’ lives. Although International Humanitarian Law strongly condemned those crimes, like Genocide, Acts of Aggression, and Chemical Warfare, the selectiveness of the application proved the superiority of political power over cosmopolitan justice. The prosecution of Saddam in front of the Iraqi High Tribunal was rich in symbolic weight; it was supposed to underline how the judicial process was torn between the demand for legal justice and the will of political vindictiveness, acting more as an example of victor’s justice rather than impartial international justice. This research opines that the trial of Saddam demonstrates structural deficiency in the international justice system in the sense that while international law codifies well, it remains sensitive in equal application. Through a comparison of the ICTY under Milosevic, the SCSL under Charles Taylor and the foundational Nuremberg trials, this paper reveals the enduring demand for comprehensive reform in global criminal justice system. The recommended reforms advocate curbing the veto powers of Security Council in atrocity offences, advancing the jurisdiction of ICC to a universal extent, instituting a neutral implementation structure, recognizing new global offences like Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and Ecocide, and developing hybrid tribunals to ensure both state sovereignty and international justice. Finally, this research finds that the case of Saddam Hussein exposes both the potential and restraint of international justice since the authority of law is bound by political will. The advancement of IHL and ICL must ensure that no future dictator is subjected to a verdict governed by political dominance rather than authority of justice.

THE COLLISION BETWEEN LAW AND POWER: SADDAM HUSSEIN AND THE IMPLEMENTATION DICHOTOMY OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW Read More »

CARBON AT THE BORDER: THE EFFECT OF THE EU’S CARBON BORDER ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM ON INDIA’S EXPORT COMPETITIVENESS

Volume IV Issue I /

CARBON AT THE BORDER: THE EFFECT OF THE EU’S CARBON BORDER ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM ON INDIA’S EXPORT COMPETITIVENESS Chinju Kuruvilla, LLM- Corporate and Commercial Law Student, Christ University, Bangalore, Karnataka (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.02 The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (henceforth referred to as CBAM), introduced as part of the European Green Deal is one of the most ambitious attempts at combining trade and climate regulations. While the EU has implemented CBAM to prevent carbon leakage, its implication for developing economies like India has not only been legally contentious, but also of economic importance. The article critically analyses the question of whether CBAM is compatible with the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework and, in particular, with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and its exceptions under Article XX of GATT. It further analyses the implications of CBAM on the Indian steel sector, the aluminium and iron sectors, which make up a large portion of Indian exports into EU, focussing on compliance challenges in the area of emissions reporting, infrastructure and institution readiness. Through a doctrinal and comparative analysis of the law, the article examines India’s current carbon regulatory framework and Carbon Credit Trading Scheme and the absence of a national carbon tax. It contends that India faces both a trade risk and an opportunity- either to have a passive reaction to the cost structures caused by CBAM, or to introduce a proactive carbon pricing strategy that could place national interests in consonance with the structure of global climate-trade governance.

CARBON AT THE BORDER: THE EFFECT OF THE EU’S CARBON BORDER ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM ON INDIA’S EXPORT COMPETITIVENESS Read More »

MISUSE OF STRATEGIC LAWSUITS AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (SLAPP) IN INDIA: NEED FOR ANTI-SLAPP LEGISLATION

Volume IV Issue I /

MISUSE OF STRATEGIC LAWSUITS AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (SLAPP) IN INDIA: NEED FOR ANTI-SLAPP LEGISLATION Rafiya Nazneen, LLM Corporate and Commercial Law, Christ Deemed to be University, Bangalore (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.01 Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are becoming more recognized as a potent tool of legal harassment, as corporations, powerful people, and state officials are now using it to silence dissent and discourage legitimate public activism. SLAPPs can be characterized as a tool that is used to exert not only financial but also psychological pressures on activists, journalists, and civil society organizations, as opposed to being a legitimate legal complaint. This paper critiques the scenario of India of misusing of SLAPPs, where the lack of sufficient defamation laws, the lengthy legal process, and unequal access to justice further intensify their chilling effect on free speech and political participation. Comparative analysis of anti-SLAPP laws in various jurisdictions, such as the United States, Canada as well as the nations in Europe, and South Africa, clarifies the variety of legislative and judicial approaches that may be used to guard civic activity. The paper notes the existing legal gaps in India that enable the continuation of SLAPPs and suggests that an effective anti-SLAPP framework based on constitutional protections to free speech, judicial effectiveness, and protection of litigation in the public interest can be implemented. The suggested structure aims to reconcile the rights of individual reputation and the right to criticize as a collective entity to strengthen the democratic spirit of India.

MISUSE OF STRATEGIC LAWSUITS AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (SLAPP) IN INDIA: NEED FOR ANTI-SLAPP LEGISLATION Read More »