LIJDLR

Volume IV Issue I

THE FUTURE OF MINORITY RIGHTS IN BANGLADESH: PROSPECTS AND CHALLENGES IN THE POST-SHEIKH HASINA ERA

Volume IV Issue I /

THE FUTURE OF MINORITY RIGHTS IN BANGLADESH: PROSPECTS AND CHALLENGES IN THE POST-SHEIKH HASINA ERA Dr. Anil Kumar Dixit, Professor, Career College of Law, Bhopal (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.09 This research paper examines the future of minority rights in Bangladesh in the aftermath of Sheikh Hasina’s ouster from power on August 5, 2024, following unprecedented student-led protests. The study is framed in the context of a post-Sheikh Hasina era, where the turnover of political power is likely to bring new political and legal priorities. Specifically, the research seeks to provide an understanding of the challenges facing minority rights holders-Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, and Indigenous peoples-within this transitional moment. Issues under consideration include communal violence, structural discrimination, and continued socio-economic marginalization. The study will inquire whether the existing legal and constitutional frameworks provide meaningful protection, noting that past assessments have found many of these protections to be aspirational, unenforced, or disconnected from prevailing political conditions. In analyzing this competing context, the research evaluates how minority rights were ostensibly secured under a Sheikh Hasina–dominated government that emphasized a secular framework, while also questioning whether the post-Hasina transition will sustain, reform, or dismantle these foundations. Additionally, the study will broaden its evaluation to include ongoing perpetrators of minority rights violations in the economic and societal spheres-such as land grabbing in Indigenous peoples’ territories, exclusion from economic opportunities in both public and private sectors, and cultural erasure through attempts to redefine national identity in exclusionary terms. Ultimately, this research situates minority rights within Bangladesh’s current political transition and assesses the potential pathways for legal and social protections in a post-conflict and post-authoritarian context.

THE FUTURE OF MINORITY RIGHTS IN BANGLADESH: PROSPECTS AND CHALLENGES IN THE POST-SHEIKH HASINA ERA Read More »

ALGORITHMIC ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND THE FUTURE OF NEUTRALITY: CAN DIGITAL PLATFORMS REPLACE HUMAN ARBITRATORS?

Volume IV Issue I /

ALGORITHMIC ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND THE FUTURE OF NEUTRALITY: CAN DIGITAL PLATFORMS REPLACE HUMAN ARBITRATORS? Kriti Agrawal, 8th Semester Student Pursuing BBA.LLB from Maharashtra National Law University, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.08 The increasing institutionalisation of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) reflects a structural transformation in contemporary systems of alternative dispute resolution. While early models of ODR were largely confined to facilitating communication, document exchange, and procedural coordination, recent platforms increasingly deploy algorithmic systems capable of predicting dispute outcomes, recommending settlements, and, in limited contexts, autonomously resolving disputes. This technological evolution raises fundamental concerns for arbitration law, particularly in relation to the principle of neutrality, which has historically derived its legitimacy from human judgment, ethical responsibility, and procedural accountability. This paper undertakes a doctrinal and socio-legal examination of whether algorithmic ODR systems can meaningfully satisfy the legal and constitutional requirements of arbitral neutrality. Drawing upon Indian arbitration jurisprudence, statutory obligations under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and international instruments such as the UNCITRAL Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution, the paper critically interrogates the widely held assumption that algorithmic decision-making is inherently objective or impartial. It demonstrates that neutrality in arbitration is not merely the absence of bias, but a normative construct shaped by discretion, contextual reasoning, transparency, and accountability. The paper further argues that claims of algorithmic neutrality are largely illusory, as such systems remain deeply influenced by human design choices, institutional incentives, and historically contingent datasets. The delegation of adjudicatory functions to opaque digital systems is shown to undermine due process guarantees, particularly the requirement of reasoned decision-making and the availability of meaningful judicial review. While recognising the efficiency and accessibility gains offered by ODR, the paper concludes that algorithmic systems cannot replace human arbitrators without eroding the normative foundations of arbitral justice. A carefully regulated hybrid framework, preserving substantive human oversight, is proposed as the only legally sustainable model for the future of digital arbitration.

ALGORITHMIC ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND THE FUTURE OF NEUTRALITY: CAN DIGITAL PLATFORMS REPLACE HUMAN ARBITRATORS? Read More »

JUDICIAL REFERRAL TO ADR UNDER SECTION 89 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908: DISCRETION, COMPULSION, AND CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS

Volume IV Issue I /

JUDICIAL REFERRAL TO ADR UNDER SECTION 89 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908: DISCRETION, COMPULSION, AND CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS Aujlaan Hamid, LL.M Scholar from Kashmir University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.07 Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 represents a legislative effort to institutionalize alternative dispute resolution (ADR) within the Indian civil justice system as a response to mounting judicial pendency. Conceived as an enabling provision, Section 89 empowers courts to refer disputes to ADR mechanisms where elements of settlement appear to exist. However, its practical application has generated significant constitutional and procedural concerns, particularly regarding the erosion of judicial discretion, voluntariness of participation, and party autonomy. This paper critically examines the transformation of Section 89 from a discretionary judicial tool into a quasi-mandatory procedural step in trial court practice. Through doctrinal analysis and judicial interpretation, especially the jurisprudence developed in Salem Advocate Bar Association and Afcons Infrastructure Ltd, the study explores how mechanical and unreasoned referrals to ADR risk converting facilitation into indirect compulsion. The paper further analyses the constitutional implications of such practices under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, highlighting concerns of arbitrariness, denial of access to justice, and dilution of procedural fairness. It argues that while ADR serves an important complementary role, its legitimacy depends upon preserving informed consent, suitability assessment, and reasoned judicial application. The paper concludes by advocating a model of structured judicial discretion that reconciles efficiency with constitutional discipline, ensuring that ADR remains a genuine alternative to adjudication rather than an imposed procedural diversion.

JUDICIAL REFERRAL TO ADR UNDER SECTION 89 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908: DISCRETION, COMPULSION, AND CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS Read More »

LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE: A DOCTRINAL AND POLICY ORIENTED STUDY OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION IN BANGLADESH

Volume IV Issue I /

LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE: A DOCTRINAL AND POLICY ORIENTED STUDY OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION IN BANGLADESH Maksudur Rahman Alif, 4th semester student at Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology, Bangladesh Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.06 The July Movement of 2024 in Bangladesh is not only an upheaval of the political nature, but also a complete legal break that re-articulated the structure of constitutional power and institutional legitimacy. This article questioned the Movement as a revolutionary process in which legality, legitimacy, and popular sovereignty came to compete with each other in a manner that undermined authoritarian power bases. By contextualizing the uprising in the issues of doctrinal contestations regarding revolutionary legality, the paper will be addressing Kelsen Grundnorm, Schmitt concept of constituent power, Fuller procedural morality, and Rawlsian aspects of public justification. With this prism, this paper examines the possibility of revolutionary legality to maintain long-term legitimacy beyond the short-term horizon of the regime overthrow. The analysis is conducted on two levels which are inter-linked, i.e. the doctrinal one and the policy-oriented one. The doctrinal aspect looks at the intellectual premises of constitutional break and succession, and the policy aspect looks at the institutional reform in the third republic in the judiciary, electoral administration and administrative accountability. Special emphasis is placed on the dangers of authoritarian entrenchment during transitional constitutionalism, frailty enforcement and how civil society, youth’s mobilisation and Diaspora activism change. Analogies with other South Asian and world revolutionary experiences would help in the critical evaluation of the experiences of Bangladesh. The paper posits that the July Movement cannot be successful unless the authoritarian order is toppled and legality established with essential qualities of transparency, participation and accountability in the processes. The article integrates theory and practice and thus makes a contribution to South Asian constitutional theory, and in offering an analytical framework to assess revolutionary constitutionalism in transitions states.

LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE: A DOCTRINAL AND POLICY ORIENTED STUDY OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION IN BANGLADESH Read More »

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 »