LIJDLR

Volume IV Issue III

AI AS AN “ACCUSED”: CAN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAVE CRIMINAL LIABILITY?

Volume IV Issue III /

AI AS AN “ACCUSED”: CAN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAVE CRIMINAL LIABILITY? Gagan Sankhla, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), 4th Year, University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University (India) Kanan Yadav, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), 4th Year, University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.369 Artificial intelligence has reshaped contemporary society by assuming cognitive functions that were once performed by human beings alone. As these systems become increasingly autonomous in healthcare, transport, finance and law enforcement, questions of accountability for the harm they occasion have grown more pressing. This paper examines whether criminal liability can attach to an artificial intelligence system, and if not, upon whom it must fall. Criminal liability in the Indian tradition rests upon two elements: the wrongful act (actus reus) and the guilty mind (mens rea). Both elements presuppose a subject capable of consciousness, moral evaluation and choice. An artificial intelligence system possesses none of these attributes, and it is therefore neither a legal person nor a bearer of criminal intention. The paper addresses three questions. First, can an artificial intelligence system be recognised as a person in criminal law? Secondly, if it can, is it capable of satisfying the standards of criminal culpability? Thirdly, do the existing Indian statutes adequately govern harm caused by autonomous systems? The study is doctrinal and comparative. It analyses the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 alongside the regulatory responses of the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom. The paper concludes that Indian law does not treat artificial intelligence as a punishable subject, that the existing cyber-law framework is inadequate to address autonomous decision-making, and that liability must be allocated among developers, deployers and users through targeted statutory amendment rather than through the creation of electronic personhood.

AI AS AN “ACCUSED”: CAN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAVE CRIMINAL LIABILITY? Read More »

ENHANCING VICTIM PROTECTION THROUGH THE CRIMINALIZATION OF RAPE IN VIETNAMESE LAW AND SELECTED ASEAN COUNTRIES

Volume IV Issue III /

ENHANCING VICTIM PROTECTION THROUGH THE CRIMINALIZATION OF RAPE IN VIETNAMESE LAW AND SELECTED ASEAN COUNTRIES Nguyen Thi Binh, PhD, Head of Academic Affairs for the Undergraduate Program, University of Law, Hue University, Hue City, Viet Nam Bui Thi Thuan Anh, PhD, University of Law, Hue University, Hue City, Viet Nam Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.368 Sexual violence presents a continuing challenge for criminal justice systems because the quality of victim protection depends not only on the severity of criminal penalties, but also on how the offence is defined, how consent is assessed, how evidence is collected, how victims are treated throughout proceedings, and whether effective recovery and compensation mechanisms exist. In Viet Nam, the Penal Code 2015, as amended, criminalizes rape, rape of a person under 16 years of age, sexual coercion, sexual coercion of a person from 13 to under 16 years of age, and other sexual offences. Resolution No. 06/2019/NQ-HDTP further explains key concepts and introduces important child-victim safeguards. Nevertheless, the Vietnamese model still separates non-consensual sexual conduct according to enumerated methods of coercion and dependency, while many international standards increasingly place the absence of freely given consent at the center of the definition of rape. Victim-support safeguards are also most developed for persons under 18, leaving a less specialized framework for adult rape victims. This article uses doctrinal analysis, comparative law and secondary-source analysis to examine Viet Nam alongside selected ASEAN comparators, particularly Singapore and the Philippines. It focuses on five connected dimensions: the actus reus and consent element; age-based protection; aggravating circumstances and penalties; procedural safeguards and evidentiary practice; and compensation and support. The comparison shows that Singapore expressly uses lack of consent for its core penetrative sexual offences, while the Philippines combines circumstance-based rape provisions with a statutory-rape threshold of 16 and a dedicated Rape Victim Assistance and Protection Act. The article states the position under the legislation currently in force in each jurisdiction, including the prohibition of the death penalty in the Philippines since 2006. The article argues that stronger victim protection in Viet Nam should proceed through a consent-centered reform of rape law, broader trauma-informed safeguards for adult as well as child victims, clearer evidentiary guidance that avoids stereotypes about resistance, and a dedicated public mechanism for crisis support and victim compensation. These measures would strengthen accountability while preserving the presumption of innocence and the requirement that criminal liability be proved according to law.

ENHANCING VICTIM PROTECTION THROUGH THE CRIMINALIZATION OF RAPE IN VIETNAMESE LAW AND SELECTED ASEAN COUNTRIES Read More »

VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN THE MODERN WORKPLACE: EMPLOYERS, EMPLOYEES AND INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS

Volume IV Issue III /

VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN THE MODERN WORKPLACE: EMPLOYERS, EMPLOYEES AND INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS Parul Raj, 5th Semester Student Pursuing B.A.LLB (H) Course at Amity Law School, Amity University Jharkhand (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.367 Vicarious liability, a doctrine rooted in the Latin maxim respondeat superior, holds one party liable for the wrongful acts of another. This study asks how far a doctrine built for master–servant relations can be applied to employers, employees and independent contractors in the modern workplace, and whether Indian law gives a coherent answer to that question. The research is doctrinal. It traces the tests for the employment relationship, from the control test to the multiple factor test and the “akin to employment” standard. It explains the two-stage test of the UK Supreme Court (a relevant relationship, then a close connection between the wrong and the role) through Lister, Christian Brothers, Mohamud, Cox, Morrison, Barclays and BXB. It examines the exceptions to the rule that a principal is not liable for an independent contractor, namely non-delegable duties and negligent selection. It then studies Indian authority on State liability (Article 300, Vidhyawati, Kasturilal), hired vehicles, banks and company directors, and assesses the barriers, the progress made and the policy position in light of the Labour Codes now in force. The main finding is that India has no single statute on vicarious liability. Courts rely on the control test and on English authority, the criminal law sets a high threshold for liability of directors, and the new Codes on Social Security and Industrial Relations deal with welfare and status but leave tortious liability for platform work unresolved. The UK cases show that a genuine independent contractor stays outside the doctrine, while integration into the principal’s business can bring a worker within it. The study concludes that the doctrine remains essential for holding employers accountable, but its application needs a clearer statutory frame. It ends with reform proposals.

VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN THE MODERN WORKPLACE: EMPLOYERS, EMPLOYEES AND INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS Read More »

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER IN INDIA

Volume IV Issue III /

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER IN INDIA Vanshika Agrawal, 7th semester pursuing B.A.L.LB court at Lucknow University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.366 The Constitution Bench decision in Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty v Union of India (2023) marks the point at which the Supreme Court’s LGBTQ+ jurisprudence met the limits of judicial power. Five years after decriminalising consensual same-sex relations in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India (2018), the Court declined to extend the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to same-sex couples. This paper asks whether a constitutional court can extend a statutory institution such as marriage to same-sex couples without breaching the separation of powers. It argues that the Court drew a defensible line between interpretation and legislation, but that judicial restraint carries a matching duty on the legislature and the executive to act. The paper follows a doctrinal method. It examines the four opinions in Supriyo, the earlier decisions in NALSA, Puttaswamy, Koushal and Navtej, and the statutes that attach legal consequences to marriage, including the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the Adoption Regulations, 2022 and personal-law statutes on succession and maintenance. It also traces developments after the judgment, among them the constitution of the Cabinet Secretary committee in April 2024, the dismissal of the review petitions in January 2025 and the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026. A short comparison with the United States, Taiwan and Thailand shows that lasting recognition has more often come through legislation prompted by courts than through adjudication alone. The paper finds that all five judges rejected a fundamental right to marry and that the Bench divided 3:2 only on civil unions and joint adoption. It concludes that Parliament remains the appropriate forum, and recommends a civil union statute, targeted amendments to the Special Marriage Act and binding administrative measures in the interim.

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER IN INDIA Read More »

SHOULD MEDIATION BE MANDATORY BEFORE CIVIL LITIGATION TO IMPROVE JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY IN PAKISTAN? LESSONS FROM INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE

Volume IV Issue III /

SHOULD MEDIATION BE MANDATORY BEFORE CIVIL LITIGATION TO IMPROVE JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY IN PAKISTAN? LESSONS FROM INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE Aqdas Tariq, LLB-IX Semester Student at Fatima Jinnah women University (Pakistan) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.365 Pakistan’s courts carried 2,371,389 pending cases on 31 December 2024, 1,965,172 of them before the district judiciary, according to the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan. This paper examines whether mediation should become a mandatory step before civil litigation and, if so, in what form. It adopts a doctrinal, analytical and comparative method, drawing on statutes, case law, official statistics, reform reports and scholarly literature. It analyses the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 2017, which applies only to the Islamabad Capital Territory, alongside the provincial ADR statutes, Section 89-A and Order X, Rule 1A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, and the Mediation Practice Direction (Civil) Rules 2023. It then compares three models: Turkey’s sequenced, statute-based pre-action mandate; Italy’s mandate, struck down in 2012 and reintroduced in narrower form in 2013; and Singapore’s model of judicial encouragement, a presumption of ADR and court-recordable settlements. The paper finds that Pakistan’s framework, although framed in mandatory terms, operates as mandatory referral with a party-consent opt-out, and that no official data record disposals through mediation. The comparators show that sequencing matters: a mandate introduced sector by sector, with safeguards, withstands legal challenge and builds capacity, while an over-broad mandate invites invalidation and resistance. The paper also identifies two institutional gaps: the absence of a national mediator-accreditation registry and the lack of a fast, distinct enforcement route for mediated settlements. It recommends a phased, sector-by-sector transition from consent-based referral to a pre-action mediation requirement, beginning with commercial disputes and followed by labour and then general civil disputes, supported by accreditation, case tracking, constitutional safeguards and harmonisation with the reconciliation stages of the Family Courts Act 1964.

SHOULD MEDIATION BE MANDATORY BEFORE CIVIL LITIGATION TO IMPROVE JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY IN PAKISTAN? LESSONS FROM INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE Read More »

AI-GENERATED WORKS AND COPYRIGHT LAWS: LEGAL CHALLENGES AND COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES

Volume IV Issue III /

AI-GENERATED WORKS AND COPYRIGHT LAWS: LEGAL CHALLENGES AND COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES Prakash Singh, 4th year Student pursuing B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) at Amity Law School, Amity University, Haryana (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.364 The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed creative expression, enabling non-human systems to generate sophisticated visual arts, literature, music, and software code. This paper examines the legal challenges posed by AI-generated content within the framework of contemporary copyright law, focusing on the fundamental requirement of human authorship. Traditional intellectual property frameworks, including international treaties such as the Berne Convention as well as national legislation in India, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, are fundamentally anthropocentric. As a result, the emergence of autonomous AI creators leaves significant doctrinal gaps regarding legal ownership, originality thresholds, and liability. Through a comparative doctrinal analysis, this study investigates whether existing legal principles can accommodate AI output or if specialized regulatory approaches are necessary. The finding indicates that while human-assisted AI creations can fit within existing copyright paradigms by attributing authorship to human contributors, fully autonomous AI creations lack human agency and cannot be granted copyright without undermining core principles of copyright law. To address this void without stifling technological innovation, the study evaluates emerging models such as sui generis rights, neighbouring rights, and contractual licensing. Ultimately, the paper recommends against recognizing AI as a legal author, advocating instead for a dedicated sui generis framework granting ten years of protection from first publication, so as to incentivize innovation while preserving the moral and theoretical integrity of human-centric copyright protection.

AI-GENERATED WORKS AND COPYRIGHT LAWS: LEGAL CHALLENGES AND COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES Read More »

CURRENT VIETNAMESE ENTERPRISE LAW FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAKEHOLDER THEORY: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL FOR INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND PRACTICAL BARRIERS

Volume IV Issue III /

CURRENT VIETNAMESE ENTERPRISE LAW FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAKEHOLDER THEORY: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL FOR INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND PRACTICAL BARRIERS Ngoc Sang Nguyen, Faculty of Law, Binh Duong University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.363 In the context of modern corporate governance, which increasingly requires companies to consider the interests of employees, customers, creditors, communities, and the environment alongside those of shareholders, stakeholder theory has emerged as an important theoretical foundation for evaluating the evolution of contemporary corporate law. Rather than viewing the corporation solely as an instrument for maximizing shareholder value, stakeholder theory emphasizes that corporate activities generate significant economic, social, and environmental impacts on a broader range of constituencies whose legitimate interests should be taken into account in corporate decision-making. In Vietnam, enterprise law has gradually reflected certain elements of this approach through the Law on Enterprises and various sector-specific regulations concerning labour protection, consumer rights, environmental protection, information disclosure, and corporate social responsibility. Nevertheless, a significant legal gap remains. Existing mechanisms for protecting stakeholder interests are still largely fragmented across different areas of law and primarily operate as separate compliance obligations, rather than being systematically incorporated into internal corporate governance structures or the statutory duties of directors and other corporate managers. Against this background, this article seeks to clarify the theoretical foundations and normative significance of stakeholder theory, assess the extent to which stakeholder-oriented principles have been institutionalized in Vietnamese enterprise law, and identify the principal legal and practical barriers to their effective implementation. Drawing on relevant international experience, the article further proposes directions for legal reform, particularly in relation to managerial duties, transparency, accountability, stakeholder consideration in corporate decision-making, and stronger coordination between enterprise law and related regulatory frameworks.

CURRENT VIETNAMESE ENTERPRISE LAW FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAKEHOLDER THEORY: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL FOR INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND PRACTICAL BARRIERS Read More »

MANUAL SCAVENGING IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE EMPLOYMENT OF MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND CONSTRUCTION OF DRY LATRINES (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1993 AND THE PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND THEIR REHABILITATION ACT, 2013

Volume IV Issue III /

MANUAL SCAVENGING IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE EMPLOYMENT OF MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND CONSTRUCTION OF DRY LATRINES (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1993 AND THE PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND THEIR REHABILITATION ACT, 2013 Arunraj.D, II Year -LLM (Human Rights) & Advocate (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.362 Manual scavenging in India remains deeply entrenched in caste-based hierarchy and social exclusion, with those engaged in this occupation overwhelmingly drawn from historically marginalised communities. An overwhelming majority of manual scavengers belong to Dalit communities, so caste continues to determine who performs India’s most hazardous and dehumanising labour. This paper undertakes a doctrinal and comparative analysis of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993 and the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, examining their constitutional basis, definitional reach, rehabilitation design, penalties and institutional oversight. It advances two hypotheses. The first is that the 2013 Act keeps open the very practice it prohibits, because the definition of “hazardous cleaning” in Section 2(1)(d) withdraws the prohibition in Section 7 wherever the prescribed protective gear and devices are supplied. The second is that the deaths that continue in sewers and septic tanks are explained less by any gap in the constitutional or statutory text than by administrative denial, systematic undercounting in official surveys, and the interposition of private contractors between the state and the worker. The paper situates both claims within the guarantees of Articles 14, 17, 21 and 23, within the penal provisions of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and within India’s commitments under the ICESCR, the ILO conventions, CERD and CEDAW. It then traces the judicial response from People’s Union for Democratic Rights (1982), through Delhi Jal Board (2011) and Safai Karamchari Andolan (2014), to Balram Singh (2023) and its continuing supervision, and assesses the institutional position of the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis. Six recommendations follow, directed at legislative amendment, enforcement and rehabilitation.

MANUAL SCAVENGING IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE EMPLOYMENT OF MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND CONSTRUCTION OF DRY LATRINES (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1993 AND THE PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND THEIR REHABILITATION ACT, 2013 Read More »

CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF DIGITAL PRIVACY AND DATA PROTECTION IN INDIA

Volume IV Issue III /

CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF DIGITAL PRIVACY AND DATA PROTECTION IN INDIA Shubham Kumar Singh, B.A.LL.B /2023-2028/7th Semester Student (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.361 Digital technology now mediates communication, work, education, commerce, payments and public services, and almost every such activity generates personal data. Individually these fragments appear ordinary, but their aggregation permits detailed profiling, which has turned digital privacy from a question of unauthorised access into one of lawful collection, purpose limitation, retention, automated inference and State access. This article asks whether the Indian statutory framework delivers the standard of informational privacy that the Constitution requires, when most of its substantive obligations remain unenforced and its regulator remains unconstituted. The study is doctrinal, analysing the Constitution, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the Rules of 2025, the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Telecommunications Act, 2023 and the decisions of the Supreme Court and the High Courts against the General Data Protection Regulation and the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act. The Act builds a coherent architecture of notice, consent, data principal rights, fiduciary duties and graded penalties, but four features weaken it: staged commencement defers the operative obligations to May 2027, so the compensation regime under the Information Technology Act governs until then; the exclusion of publicly available personal data leaves the training of artificial intelligence systems largely outside the Act; the exemption power for State instrumentalities and the power to call for information face constitutional challenge; and the Data Protection Board has no appointed members. The article recommends that Parliament narrow the exemption power, confer a right against solely automated decision-making, and insulate appointments to the Board from executive control.

CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF DIGITAL PRIVACY AND DATA PROTECTION IN INDIA Read More »

CASE ANALYSIS ON STATE OF TAMIL NADU v. GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU & ANR

Volume IV Issue III /

CASE ANALYSIS ON STATE OF TAMIL NADU v. GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU & ANR Panbarasi. K, LL.M (IPR Law), 3rd Semester, Student at Government Law College Thiruchirappalli, affiliated with Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai (India) Selvaprasad. T, LL.M (IPR Law), 3rd Semester, Student at Government Law College Thiruchirappalli, affiliated with Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.360 The judgment of the Supreme Court of India in State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu & Anr. is a defining pronouncement on the powers of a Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, and the decision of 8 April 2025 must now be read with the advisory opinion of the Constitution Bench in In re: Assent, Withholding or Reservation of Bills by the Governor and the President of India, delivered on 20 November 2025. The dispute arose when the Governor of Tamil Nadu kept twelve Bills pending for nearly three years after their passage by the State Legislature. He then withheld assent without returning the Bills with a message, as the first proviso to Article 200 requires. When the Bills were re-enacted without material change, he reserved them for the President instead of granting assent. The Court had to determine the scope of the Governor’s powers under Article 200, whether he possesses independent discretion in discharging that function, whether prolonged inaction attracts judicially enforceable timelines, and the extent to which such action is amenable to judicial review. The Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan held that Article 200 sanctions neither a pocket veto nor an absolute veto, and that a Governor who withholds assent must return the Bill to the Legislature with a message. It further held that the Governor is ordinarily bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, prescribed outer timelines under Articles 200 and 201, barred the reservation of a re-passed Bill, and deemed the ten Bills assented to under Article 142. The Constitution Bench has since disapproved each of those four propositions. This comment analyses the facts, the legal issues, the submissions of the parties, the Court’s reasoning, and its standing after the Reference.

CASE ANALYSIS ON STATE OF TAMIL NADU v. GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU & ANR Read More »