LIJDLR

Volume IV Issue III

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADR MECHANISMS: INNOVATIVE PATHWAYS FROM TRADITION TO TRANSFORMATION IN THE GLOBAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Volume IV Issue III /

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADR MECHANISMS: INNOVATIVE PATHWAYS FROM TRADITION TO TRANSFORMATION IN THE GLOBAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Zainul Sajdeen, 7th Semester B.ALL.B Student at Jamia Millia Islamia University , New Delhi , (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.283 In the age of increasing global challenges, resolving disputes through traditional court procedures is often lengthy, expensive, and procedurally complex. In today’s highly competitive environment, both nations and individuals endeavour to secure justice, rights, and remedies through effective institutional mechanisms. This has led to numerous disputes and caused instability worldwide, whether in the Russia-Ukraine war or the Palestine-Israel conflict. The value of ordinary human life is undermined in many international and national disputes. Exploring innovative solutions to resolve disputes, including mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and negotiation, offers hope for millions of people. These mechanisms reduce not only the cost and time involved in settlement but also make justice more accessible and approachable. This paper examines how Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms are driving a transformative shift in the global justice system, aligning with the conference theme “From Tradition to Transformation: Innovative Approaches to Alternative Dispute Resolution.” International instruments that support ADR mechanisms include the United Nations Charter of 1945, the Hague Conventions for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, and the 1982 Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, among others. This paper also addresses international human rights violations in environmental law disputes, including matters involving the climate justice network Rete Legalità per il Clima, hydrocarbon operations in Congo, and selected UK-based environmental accountability cases. While challenges such as enforceability, procedural fairness, transparency, and the digital divide continue to exist, this research argues for deeper integration of innovative ADR into the national and international human rights arena.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADR MECHANISMS: INNOVATIVE PATHWAYS FROM TRADITION TO TRANSFORMATION IN THE GLOBAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Read More »

ANALYSING THE PREVALENT ISSUES ON ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES IN INDIA AND LIMITED JUDICIAL INTERVENTION: EMERGING ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

Volume IV Issue III /

ANALYSING THE PREVALENT ISSUES ON ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES IN INDIA AND LIMITED JUDICIAL INTERVENTION: EMERGING ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Shivani Johri, Assistant Professor, HILSR, Jamia Hamdard University, Delhi (India) Prof. Dr. Tarkesh Molia, Professor, Sharda University, Greater Noida (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.282 Arbitration in India has developed as an important alternative to traditional litigation, particularly in commercial disputes where delay, procedural complexity and judicial backlog remain serious concerns. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks to promote party autonomy, procedural efficiency, finality of arbitral awards and minimal judicial intervention. However, Indian arbitration jurisprudence has historically reflected a continuing tension between arbitral autonomy and court supervision, especially in matters concerning arbitrability, interim relief, appointment of arbitrators, public policy review and enforcement of foreign awards. This paper critically examines the scope of judicial intervention in arbitration proceedings in India, with specific focus on the legal position before and after Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc. The pre-BALCO position, shaped by decisions such as Bhatia International and Venture Global, permitted wider Indian court intervention even in foreign-seated arbitrations. BALCO marked a significant doctrinal shift by reaffirming territoriality and restricting the application of Part I of the 1996 Act to India-seated arbitrations. The paper further analyses subsequent legislative amendments and judicial decisions that have attempted to strengthen arbitral independence while preserving limited judicial oversight in exceptional cases. The paper argues that judicial intervention remains justified where it protects procedural fairness, public policy, statutory rights and non-arbitrable subject matters. Nevertheless, excessive court interference undermines the efficiency, finality and autonomy of arbitration. The study concludes that Indian arbitration law is moving toward a more arbitration-friendly framework, but continued doctrinal clarity and institutional reform are necessary to balance arbitral autonomy with legitimate judicial supervision.

ANALYSING THE PREVALENT ISSUES ON ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES IN INDIA AND LIMITED JUDICIAL INTERVENTION: EMERGING ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Read More »

REIMAGINING PATENT JUSTICE: TRANSFORMING INDIA’S INNOVATION DISPUTES THROUGH SPECIALIZED ADR

Volume IV Issue III /

REIMAGINING PATENT JUSTICE: TRANSFORMING INDIA’S INNOVATION DISPUTES THROUGH SPECIALIZED ADR Harsh Pandey, 4th Year BA LLB Students, CHRIST (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR (India) Shubhangi Joshi, 4th Year BA LLB Students, CHRIST (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.281 The expansion of the innovation driven industries in India, particularly in the pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, telecommunications and standard essential patents (SEPs) which led to a significant rise in the complex patent disputes. While statutory remedies exist under the Patents Act, 1970 and through commercial courts, patent litigation in India continues to face structural challenges including prolonged timelines, high costs, technical intricacy and multi- jurisdictional enforcement concerns. Against this backdrop, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms such as arbitration, mediation frameworks are increasingly being considered as viable and innovation sensitive alternatives. This doctrinal paper critically examines whether the current ADR frameworks in India are institutionally and jurisprudentially equipped to handle the patent disputes effectively. It evaluates ADR through parameters of time efficiency, cost rationality, party autonomy, confidentiality, enforceability and preservation of commercial relationships. Particular attention is devoted to the doctrinal debate surrounding arbitrability, especially the distinction between right in rem (patent validity) and rights in personam (licensing, royalty, infringement settlements) and the evolving judicial approach in India. The research further undertakes a comparative study of the international institutional models, including the WIPO Arbitration & Mediation Center and administrative enforcement frameworks in jurisdictions such as China, Singapore, & The USA. By integrating comparative insights with domestic legal analysis, this paper assesses the feasibility of adapting specialized patent ADR mechanism within India’s legal architecture. It concludes by proposing structured reforms aimed at institutional strengthening, expert driven adjudication, technology enabled dispute resolution to transform ADR from a peripheral alternative into a central pillar of patent governance.

REIMAGINING PATENT JUSTICE: TRANSFORMING INDIA’S INNOVATION DISPUTES THROUGH SPECIALIZED ADR Read More »

VALIDITY OF EXCLUSIONARY CLAUSES IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT WORKS CONTRACTS: INTEREST, COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER-CAUSED DELAY

Volume IV Issue III /

VALIDITY OF EXCLUSIONARY CLAUSES IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT WORKS CONTRACTS: INTEREST, COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER-CAUSED DELAY Satharasi Vasudeva Naidu, Professor & Former Principal, University Law College and Department of Studies in Law, Bangalore University, (India) Prof. Dr. N. Dasharath, Professor & Former Principal, University Law College and Department of Studies in Law, Bangalore University, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.280 Indian Government construction contracts frequently contain non-negotiable clauses that restrict claims for interest on amounts withheld and deny compensation for delays covered by extensions of time. Such clauses are commonly found in standard-form contracts used by public agencies such as the Indian Railways, NHAI, KPWD and K-RIDE, and are generally defended on the basis of freedom of contract. This paper examines the enforceability of such exclusionary clauses where delay or non-payment is caused by the employer’s own conduct, including arbitrary deductions, failure to provide land or drawings, delayed certification, or non-performance of reciprocal contractual obligations. The research adopts doctrinal and comparative methods and analyses the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the Interest Act, 1978, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the MSMED Act, 2006, along with leading judicial decisions on government works contracts. The paper specifically contrasts the contractual approach in Ramnath International Construction (P) Ltd. v. Union of India with the public-policy reasoning adopted in Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Ltd. v. Union of India and MBL Infrastructures Ltd. v. Delhi Metro Rail Corp. The analysis argues that while reasonable and symmetrical risk-allocation clauses may remain enforceable, absolute exclusions that permit public employers to avoid liability for their own breach should be treated as void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act. It further proposes a statutory amendment invalidating clauses that exclude liability for wilful breach, arbitrary withholding or employer-induced delay, together with corresponding reforms to Government Construction Contracts to protect contractors from wrongful retention of payments.

VALIDITY OF EXCLUSIONARY CLAUSES IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT WORKS CONTRACTS: INTEREST, COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER-CAUSED DELAY Read More »

INTEGRATING DARUL QAZA AS COMMUNITY-BASED PRIVATE MEDIATION CENTERS WITHIN INDIA’S ADR FRAMEWORK

Volume IV Issue III /

INTEGRATING DARUL QAZA AS COMMUNITY-BASED PRIVATE MEDIATION CENTERS WITHIN INDIA’S ADR FRAMEWORK Imran Ullah Khan, Research Scholar at Faculty of Law, Integral University, Lucknow, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.279 A renewed push for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in India has revived interest in traditional, indigenous and community-based mechanisms of dispute resolution. Darul Qaza represents a historically rooted institution within the Muslim community aimed at resolving matrimonial, family, community and civil disputes through principles grounded in Islamic jurisprudence. However, its legal status, constitutional legitimacy and intersection with the formal statutory framework remain subjects of complex debate. This paper investigates the operational framework of Darul Qaza through the lens of modern mediation principles, such as voluntariness, accessibility and party autonomy while evaluating its potential transformation into recognized private mediation centers within India’s formal ADR ecosystem. It further identifies key challenges including enforceability, legal validity, gender justice concerns, secularism, debates around public perception and overlap with formal courts of law. This paper argues that instead of viewing Darul Qaza as parallel judicial systems, they may be restructured as voluntary community mediation centers functioning within the statutory safeguards. Such an integration can strengthen access to justice, reduce litigation burden, and preserve cultural autonomy while upholding constitutional values. The paper proposes evolving a reform-oriented model that harmonizes community-based dispute resolution with constitutional policies, reflecting the broader transformation of traditional justice systems within modern democracies. The paper explores avenues for future collaboration between the indigenous and cultural ADR practices of Darul Qaza and conventional modes of conflict resolution within the modern Indian ADR regimen. It further proposes mediation-friendly reforms that can leverage the widespread social acceptance of Darul Qaza, thereby offering a localized, cross-cultural model for efficient dispute resolution.

INTEGRATING DARUL QAZA AS COMMUNITY-BASED PRIVATE MEDIATION CENTERS WITHIN INDIA’S ADR FRAMEWORK Read More »

PROTECTING LIBERIA’S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE DIGITAL AGE: NATIONAL SECURITY LESSONS FROM THE ROBERTS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CCTV FOOTAGE INCIDENT

Volume IV Issue III /

PROTECTING LIBERIA’S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE DIGITAL AGE: NATIONAL SECURITY LESSONS FROM THE ROBERTS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CCTV FOOTAGE INCIDENT Dr. Ambrues Monboe Nebo (Doctor of Sociology), Adjunct Faculty, Department of Criminal Justice and Forensic Science Program, African Methodist Episcopal University, Monrovia, Liberia, West Africa Professor Edward Lama Wonkeryor, Ph.D., Professor -Graduate School, Stella Maris Polytechnic University, St. Joseph Campus, Capitol Hill, Monrovia, Liberia, West Africa Professor Israel Obiasogu, Ph.D., Professor of Socilogy, African Methodist Episcopal University, Monrovia, Liberia, West Africa Graduate Program in Education, University of Liberia, Monrovia, Liberia Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.278 This study examines the protection of critical infrastructure in Liberia’s digital security environment, using the US$19.2 million cocaine seizure at Roberts International Airport (RIA) and the subsequent CCTV footage controversy as a focal case. The study examines the national security implications of vulnerabilities in surveillance systems, digital information governance, and institutional safeguards within Liberia’s critical infrastructure architecture. Guided by Securitization Theory and critical infrastructure protection frameworks, the study analyzes how surveillance governance, legal arrangements, institutional coordination, and information control influence national security outcomes in the context of transnational organized crime. Methodologically, the study adopts a qualitative case study design based on document analysis of official statements, legal and policy documents, media reports, and scholarly literature to examine the security, governance, and institutional dimensions of the incident. Findings reveal that RIA represents a high-value critical infrastructure asset exposed not only to external threats from transnational criminal networks but also to internal vulnerabilities involving surveillance governance, information management, and institutional coordination. The analysis demonstrates that the circulation of CCTV footage generated concerns regarding digital evidence integrity, investigative confidentiality, cybersecurity governance, and the protection of sensitive operational information. The study further finds that the controversy reflected securitization dynamics in which perceived surveillance vulnerabilities were constructed as broader national security concerns, resulting in increased scrutiny of institutional resilience and governance capacity. The study concludes that Liberia’s emerging cybersecurity and digital evidence framework should be strengthened through a comprehensive critical infrastructure protection strategy, sector-specific surveillance governance standards, improved inter-agency coordination, and enhanced cybersecurity controls for critical information systems. These measures are essential for strengthening national security resilience, protecting strategic infrastructure, and sustaining public trust in the digital age.

PROTECTING LIBERIA’S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE DIGITAL AGE: NATIONAL SECURITY LESSONS FROM THE ROBERTS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CCTV FOOTAGE INCIDENT Read More »

IDENTITY WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY: RETHINKING THIRD-PARTY FUNDING REGULATION

Volume IV Issue III /

IDENTITY WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY: RETHINKING THIRD-PARTY FUNDING REGULATION Nidhi Choube, 8th Semester, 4th year, BBALLB (Hons.) Student at GD Goenka University, (India) Somya Shrita, 4th Semester, 2nd year, LLB (Hons.) Student at GD Goenka University, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.277 Third-party funding (TPF) has moved from the margins to the mainstream of cross-border corporate arbitration, gradually reshaping the allocation of power in high-value disputes. However, the existing regulatory framework remains confined to a narrow conception of transparency, largely limited to disclosure of the funder’s identity, without examining the substantive terms of funding arrangements. This paper argues that such an approach is insufficient. In practice, third-party funders often influence litigation and settlement strategies, including decisions on whether to pursue or resolve disputes, despite lacking formal accountability within the corporate structure. Essentially, there are three challenges that have not been explored much in relation to this change. Firstly, the funding agreement may give the party significant control over the proceedings, including the veto over the settlement, without any institutional or national limitation on this control. Secondly, the current conflict of interest regimes is inadequate to reflect the complex relationships between the arbitrators and the funders in the international arbitration community. Thirdly, there is the breach of confidentiality in cross-border disclosure of sensitive information to the funders, especially where different standards are applied in different jurisdictions. TPF facilitates the influence of external actors over significant outcomes without corresponding fiduciary obligations toward the corporation. Focusing on regulatory approaches adopted by leading arbitration centres and drawing from high-value funded disputes, the paper proposes a three-pillar framework combining corporate law obligations, strengthened institutional rules, and a model international provision. The objective is to realign arbitration practice with principles of corporate accountability in an increasingly globalised dispute resolution landscape.

IDENTITY WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY: RETHINKING THIRD-PARTY FUNDING REGULATION Read More »

ARBITRATION AND THE COURTS IN INDIA: AREAS OF CONFLICT, JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, AND THE EVOLVING DOCTRINE OF KOMPETENZ-KOMPETENZ

Volume IV Issue III /

ARBITRATION AND THE COURTS IN INDIA: AREAS OF CONFLICT, JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, AND THE EVOLVING DOCTRINE OF KOMPETENZ-KOMPETENZ Adv. Mrunal Dhamale, Advocate,LL.M, (India) Adv. Shreya Inde, Advocate,LL.M, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.276 Arbitration has become a key part of India’s modern dispute-resolution policy. India’s experience with arbitration has been uniquely shaped and at times constrained by the pervasive influence of courts, whose constitutional responsibility to uphold justice often conflicts with the foundational principles of arbitral independence. This research paper analyzes the intricate and dynamic relationship between arbitration and Indian courts, concentrating on the specific “areas of conflict” that emerge at different procedural stages: initiation of arbitration, mandatory reference, judicial intervention during proceedings, court assistance, court-ordered interim relief, judicial review at the conclusion of proceedings, and the pivotal issue of jurisdiction, particularly under the doctrine of Kompetenz-Kompetenz. The study underscores that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, was designed to minimize judicial interference to the greatest degree possible. Indian jurisprudence has, however, consistently redefined the parameters of intervention, at times broadening and at other times narrowing its scope. In important cases like SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering, Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium (BALCO), and Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading. This study examines whether this fluctuation signifies organic legal evolution or systemic unpredictability that jeopardizes India’s aspiration to establish itself as an international arbitration hub. The fundamental analytical framework is the tension between judicial oversight and arbitral autonomy. Additionally, the paper conducts a comprehensive evaluation of the growing autonomy of arbitration tribunals, particularly following the amendments in 2015, 2019, and 2021, which markedly curtailed the previously extensive discretionary authority of courts. At the same time, unresolved issues like whether fraud can be arbitrated, the limits of public-policy review, and challenges under Sections 9, 11, 34 and 37 are causing problems.

ARBITRATION AND THE COURTS IN INDIA: AREAS OF CONFLICT, JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, AND THE EVOLVING DOCTRINE OF KOMPETENZ-KOMPETENZ Read More »

CELESTIAL SOVEREIGNTY AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: A LEGAL AND ETHICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION IN THE AGE OF AI

Volume IV Issue III /

CELESTIAL SOVEREIGNTY AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: A LEGAL AND ETHICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION IN THE AGE OF AI Sukaina Mehdi, Assistant Professor at Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies – TC, affiliated to GGSIP University (India) Samreen Warsi, Assistant Professor at HILSR, Jamia Hamdard University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.275 With more satellites, observatories and other space assets being deployed continuously, the global space economy has expanded rapidly for technological advancement. It has also resulted in the accumulation of orbital debris, which threatens the long-term sustainability of the near-Earth orbital environment. The issue involves international space law, artificial intelligence and environmental ethics, all of which must be understood collectively to develop a robust regulatory framework for space sustainability. The Supreme Court of India has substantially developed environmental jurisprudence by expanding Article 21 to include the right to clean air, a safe environment and ecological protection. This study argues for extending the precautionary principle and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to outer space by treating the orbital environment as a shared ecological heritage. AI plays a dual role: it can assist in climate monitoring, space situational awareness and mitigation of risks to orbital assets, while also generating new legal challenges concerning algorithmic accountability in autonomous collision-avoidance manoeuvres. The paper further argues that Extended Producer Responsibility should be applied to satellite manufacturers and operators through legal and financial mandates for de-orbiting end-of-life assets, including de-orbit bonds and Orbital EPR Plans. Applying a pragmatist research paradigm, the paper examines existing ESG regulations and their inadequate consideration of orbital pollution. It finally argues for a Space Sustainability Treaty, supported by a proposed Delhi Declaration on Orbital Sustainability, incorporating AI-driven monitoring and a stewardship-based legal model to ensure that exploration of the final frontier does not repeat the collapse of terrestrial ecological systems.

CELESTIAL SOVEREIGNTY AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: A LEGAL AND ETHICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION IN THE AGE OF AI Read More »

THE EVOLUTION OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN DIGITAL GOVERNANCE: CHALLENGES IN AUTOMATED ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION-MAKING

Volume IV Issue III /

THE EVOLUTION OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN DIGITAL GOVERNANCE: CHALLENGES IN AUTOMATED ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION-MAKING C. Justin, MA, M.Phil., M.L., Research Scholar, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.274 The increasing integration of digital technologies into public administration has fundamentally transformed the manner in which governments deliver services and make administrative decisions. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, predictive analytics and algorithm-driven systems are now employed in areas such as taxation, welfare distribution, immigration, policing, recruitment and public service delivery. While these technological advancements have improved administrative efficiency and reduced human intervention, they have simultaneously raised significant concerns regarding transparency, accountability and procedural fairness. Decisions that were traditionally exercised through human discretion are increasingly being delegated to automated systems whose internal functioning often remains inaccessible to both administrators and affected individuals. The doctrine of natural justice has historically served as a fundamental safeguard against arbitrary administrative action. Principles such as audi alteram partem, the rule against bias and the requirement to provide reasoned decisions have evolved through judicial interpretation to ensure fairness in administrative governance. However, the emergence of automated decision-making presents new challenges that conventional administrative law was never designed to address. Algorithmic opacity, embedded bias, absence of meaningful human intervention and limited opportunities for review have created a complex legal landscape in which procedural safeguards may be substantially weakened. This paper critically examines the evolving relationship between natural justice and digital governance by analysing the implications of automated administrative decision-making. It evaluates the adequacy of existing legal principles in addressing algorithmic governance and explores comparative developments in the European Union, the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions. The study further examines the Indian constitutional and administrative law framework to determine whether present legal safeguards sufficiently protect procedural fairness in the digital era. The paper argues that the doctrine of natural justice must evolve beyond traditional procedural requirements to incorporate principles of algorithmic transparency, explainability and meaningful human oversight, thereby preserving the rule of law within increasingly digitalised systems of public administration.

THE EVOLUTION OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN DIGITAL GOVERNANCE: CHALLENGES IN AUTOMATED ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION-MAKING Read More »