Saturday, September 4, 2010

UNTITLED EMOTIONS

The old campus of Kiit Law School has not only housed but harbored around five hundred intellectual legal minds. It has been for two long years that I have shared my thoughts with this not so living entity. The events of the very first day in the womb of this campus are still afresh in my mind. The premises of this make shift campus was a brain child of my mentor and the founder director of Kiit Law School. This campus always carried my mentor’s aura and his ambitious educational pattern, which has always propelled my career as a law student. As we all are aware that time and tide waits for none, a similar situation was faced by this law school. One year back there was advent of a new mentor and director with his new dynamic and prospective plans which have consistently yielded successful results. His constant and impeccable support is undeniable. The mentors changed and the priests which are none but the faculties of this temple of education also changed but someone was always there. This someone is our very own old campus. In the heart of this campus was a small room allotted for mooting activities. I might not have visited the urinary that often but of course this consortium was my favorite destination. This moot hall has witnessed great dialects and stood many fiery arguments but has never fettered any ambition. I still remember the seniors marketing presentation on transportation and a small physical conflict of opinions. In these three years this campus has seen many ups and downs. Ups being the student achievements and lows being the departing priests who had left this campus in ruins but with the candid efforts of our new director the law school is standing tall again. The crown of this law campus has been its library. My juniors had the pleasure to decorate the crown with the ruby of the first moot winner’s trophy. The library has also given shelter to many cozy birds. On eve of the arrival of the 4th batch, there was a realization that this law campus could not sustain them and there was expeditious work on other side, i.e. the new campus was build but no one notices the weeping tears of this old campus. On 4th September, 2010 the heart of this old campus was pierced. The watch was stand still at 6:05 PM and with a single stroke it was removed and there was no more a heart for our beloved old campus. In the excitement of modern amenities to be provided in the new campus we have overlooked the pain involved in the process. Of course we will celebrate the teachers’ day on 5th but please commemorate our old campus. The walls of knowledge and foundations of justice shall ever stand in the old campus 7 of KLS…
Pickon Biswal

Role of Patent Laws in Promoting R&D in Pharmaceutical Companies

In a recent blog post in Spicyip (available here) the author has raised certain questions in regards to the prevailing state of research and development of new drugs in the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry. At the end of his post he asks “Does the current legal regime including the patent regime provide incentives for radical innovation? Or is it lopsided in its approach of promoting only generic research? If yes, is this salubrious from a long term perspective? Does the extant legal and policy framework maintain a salutary balance between addressing public health concerns and providing incentives for radical innovation?”
To answer such issues I would certainly have to draw attention to the fact that throughout history innovations or development has never been dependent on the protection provided by intellectual property. Although the presence of IPR traces back a long way, its full fledged application has only emerged in the last century. Having said so I do realize the need for laws to protect and promote research in fields such as biotechnology due the cost factor and the degree of risk involved.
However to put the blame on the present model of IP protection and to proceed on a trip looking for solutions in the present legal framework would be nothing short of tumbling down the wrong rabbit hole.
At the end of the day companies decide their own vision; the fact whether Dr. Reddy's Laboratories keeps or removes the words, ‘discovery led global pharmaceutical company’ from its grandiose vision statement has very little to do with extant patent laws and more to do with the risk and gain assessment of that corporation coupled with its ambition and core-mentality.
Success stories of pharmaceutical companies reaping great profits from the present legal paradigm of patent laws are numerous. However what we fail to appreciate is the fact that behind every success story like Lipitor hides tens of failures like Torcetrapib (Pfizer lost nearly $1 billion invested developing the failed drug).
The real issue does not lie in the laws but in the existing attitude to R&D in India, both corporate and Government. We are more than happy to buy technology rather than promoting or investing to develop them. Various reasons and factors can be attributed to the sad state of innovation done in our country considering the fact that there is hardly and lack of talented minds present in the country. Our step motherly approach to research ensures that the state is denied of any return from the hundreds of crores it invests in educating its citizens.
So the question is less of whether the law can do more to promote the development and more on the lines of whether Indian Pharmaceutical corporations along with the Government are willing to take the added risks to invest and promote a culture of R & D.

Alimpan Chatterjee
B.A.LL.B, 5th Sem

Preservation of Rule of Law- Bar and the Bench

This post is in response to the ongoing lawyers strike in state of Orissa. They have been boycotting the courts including that of the High court at Cuttack since August 25th in protest against the death of advocate Bishnu Charan Dash in the Bagalpur police firing on August 23rd. Dash’s death had evoked protests from all sections of the bar. Surely the death of Mr. Dash should be condemned, but the larger question here is to what extent the interests of thousands of litigants can be put at stake. The third phase of the trial in the Kandhamal nun rape case was scheduled to begin on Monday after several delays. Unfortunately it couldn’t, as the lawyers were too busy on the streets up in protest. Lord Justice Stephen Sedley in his Hamlyn Lectures had remarked that the rule of law is indeed necessary but not a sufficient condition of a decent society. There is more to a decent society than the rule of law. Understanding and awareness of one’s rights need to be imbibed and that can be done only through education. He then concludes by saying that “if lawyers are to be educators, they must be trend setters inspiring public confidence.” Mr. Nariman in his autobiography Before Memory Fades writes “We demean our ourselves and our profession when we resolve to strike work, and so paralyze the working of the courts, tribunals and statutory authorities where public cases and causes demand our expertise, intercession and assistance.” We should not forget that the judiciary of our great country is the guardian of the constitution and the protector of civil liberties. In the discharge of its obligations the judiciary draws heavily from the bar. It’s a conjoint effort of the Bar and the Bench. If the Bar fails in its primary obligation to protect the interests of its clients, the Bench as a necessary consequence fails as well. We should remember what the greatest of the American trial lawyers Clarence Darrow said:
“I have never turned my back on any defendant no matter what the charge, when the cry is the loudest the defendant needs the lawyer most; when every man has turned against him the law provides that he should have a lawyer. I can honestly say I have kept the faith.”

Kanad Bagchi

Friday, September 3, 2010

Khaps want laws against homosexuality, surrogate motherhood and stern punishment for pornographic offences


The recent news article on the demands of Khaps points out the fact that the khap panchayats are not even sure of the fact what they want, first they want a ban on same gotra marriages now then on the practise of homosexuality and  now surrogate motherhood. The first question is what authority do they posses to press for such legal sanctions and for what reasons. They are behaving like some kind of  ethical and moral conditioners with no authority. On the top of it they are threatening the government with a strike on December 21. What do they think they are some kind of godly revelations who's primary duty is to protect the customs and traditions and shut all doors of liberty of the people and turn our heads to the opposite side so that we can only see the past and not the future. They think that sitting in some corner of India they can enforce what ever they want on the whole of India and without even taking into considerations what others want. Even if they demand for some kind of state amendments, their demands are on those issue are completely against modern day society. They want lok adalat status with judicial powers so that they can  kill, slaughter people whenever and wherever they want. What problem do they have with surrogate motherhood? Are they going to say it is like playing god and questioning their authority, come one god's authority was questioned when man discovered ways to produce fire by striking rocks, that was questioning god's authority, done is some century B.C. 
The punishment for an offence under section 292 of the IPC(Obscenity as an offence)  is on first conviction with imprisonment (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to two years, and with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, and in the event of a second or subsequent convictions, with imprisonment (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to five years, and also with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.
The punishment for an offence under section 67 of the IT Act is on first conviction with imprisonment (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to five years, and with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, and in the event of a second or subsequent convictions, with imprisonment (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to ten years, and also with fine which may extend to two lakh rupees. Even with these kind of punishment they want 'stern' measures to be taken. Now its very difficult to gauge what stern punishment is. If they are hoping for some kind of life imprisonment or death penalty, this hope is completely out of the question. Can't these khaps think of anything which is more civilised and does not amount to killing. Really what are they panchayats or terrorist organizations ????

Sourav Dan
BSc. LLB, 3rd Year

Constitution Making in Nepal


The historic Jana-Aandolan II brought republic in Nepal after the election of Constituent Assembly on May 2008. With the support of five hundred and sixty members of Constitution Assembly new Nepal was formed, ending two hundred years of monarchy. The Constituent Assembly election in Nepal has established the primacy of ballots over bullets and unveiled the mandate for peaceful change. The advent of CPN (Maoist) that came out the biggest political party from the elections has provided it an opportunity to transform its wartime ideology, structure and goals into a mass-based competitive party. But due to Prachanda’s attempt to sack General Rookmangud katawal (army chief), opposed by President Ram Baran Yadav forced him to resign as Prime Minister. Promises to make Constitution within time period and making Nepal as like Switzerland within ten years were as good as strategy to win election. With this controversy CPN (Maoist) decided not to take part in newly formed government under Madhav Kumar Nepal inspite of his defeat in Constituent Assembly Election, he became Prime Minster of Nepal. After a year he resigned in an effort to help the government move past its current deadlock and to pave the way for a national consensus government as demanded by opposition. With his resignation also the three main parties (Nepali congress, CPN and UML) tried for a consensus government but dispute regarding leadership in consensus government, they didn’t succeed. Parliament failed to elect Prime Minster even after fifth round of voting. As one of the main party UML stayed neutral in every voting. Whereas other small parties had been bargaining.
At the present it’s very difficult to have a consensus government until the recruitment of combatants of People’s Liberation Army. And there is no leader like late Girija Prasad Koirala who can address the interests of all political parties and capable of forming consensus government. Due to instability of government, the farming of new Constitution has being under dolderm, as Constitutional committee has being working on different issues but still many issues to be finalized. Due to political instability the Constituent Assembly is also on stay at the moment as Constituent Assembly works as a Parliament also. This is just outline of present situation of Nepal and in coming post I will be referring problem in framing new Constitution.
Pratyush Upreti
Bsc.LLb (Hons) 3rd Year

Vedanta Vicissitude

Nehru on the eve of laying the foundation-stone for India’s first major river valley project, the Hirakud Dam in 1948, told ten thousand tribal residents of Orissa who were facing the grim prospect of displacement "If you are to suffer, you should suffer in the interest of the country”. Justification provided for the state action was agrarian reform policies. The implications of the proposed mining activity by Vedanta in the State, brought to light by the recent four members Dr. N.C. Saxena committee report, has resurrected the long forgotten wounds of tribal residents of Orissa. Historically, the relationship between tribal communities in India and forests was characterized by co-existence. These communities are also considered integral to the mutual survival and sustainability. This symbiotic relationship has corroborated into customary rights over forest produce. But these rights were not recognized and recorded by the government while consolidating state forests during the colonial period as well as in independent India. This injustice was further perpetuated by non-recognition of such rights of the tribals in the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 (the ‘WPA’) and the Forest Conservation Act 1980 (the ‘FCA’). Both the pieces of legislation found the environmental protection regimes and rights of tribal communities as incompatible. However, the recent 2006 legislation i.e. Recognition of Forest Right Act, 2006 (FRA) is some light at the end of the tunnel. This piece of legislation has identified and recognized the forest rights of tribal’s. The recommendations in Dr. Saxena Committee report seeking rejection of clearance to Vedanta Company has been backboned by the FRA. The finding of the committee reveals that the entire proposed mining lease area (PML) of Niyamgiri hills area allocated to Vedanta for mining falls within the category of Community Forest Resource (CFR), as defined in the Forest Rights Act (FRA), allocated to the tribal habitants in the villages inside or surrounding the four forest blocks. These villages have been vested with recognizable community and habitat rights by GoI under section 4(1) of the FRA. The mining activity of Vedanta if allowed would be clearly contrary to the aforesaid mentioned provision of FRA. As was suggested by the committee, the environmental ministry has rightly denied giving of clearance certificate to Vedanta for its proposed mining project on the same grounds. Human costs of this project is also very high, Dr. N.C. Saxena committee report also states that displacement would be one of the inevitable consequences of this project. Amidst all these legal connotations, the politicization of this issue, with the state government supporting Vedanta and a recent visit by a leader of the ruling party at power in the center, Rahul Gandhi, to the proposed site at Niyamgiri Hills to oppose the project, I can only hope that the rights of the tribal’s are not put to sacrilege.

References For Further Reading
1. Lovleen Bhullar, ‘The Indian Forest Rights Act 2006: A Critical Appraisal’, 4/1 Law, Environment and Development Journal (2008), p. 20, available at http://www.lead-journal.org/content/08020.pdf

2. Dr. N.C. Saxena, D.r. S. Parasuraman, Dr. Promode Kant, Dr. Amita Baviskar, Report of The Four Member Committee for Investigation Into The Proposal Submitted by The Orissa Mining Company for Bauxite mining in Niyamgiri, August 16 2010, at 8-9.

3. section 2(a), FRA, 2006.

4. Soumyajyoti Biswal, Cost of Development: Displacement, Orissa Economic Association Journal (2009).

Plight of UGC Regulations

The recent Rajasthan High Court dictum on the implications of UGC Regulations on the State Universities has once again reiterated the opinion of Supreme Court in T.P. George Case. Indeed this was not the first judgment when the High Courts in India have ingenuously overlooked the binding mandate of UGC Regulations. This dictum of Rajasthan High Court contributes to an array of decisions whereby the judiciary has made a mockery of the legal solemnity to the Regulations passed by a body which has been constitutionally entrusted to make provision for the co-ordination and determination of standards in Universities. The thought that these regulations which are specifically made within the ambit of the power conferred on UGC are not binding on the Universities will surely undermine confidence in the UGC as a body established with a constitutional mandate. The main question before the Courts has always been that whether the UGC Regulations are binding on the State Universities. Before I analyze the correctness of these decisions it is quite pertinent to briefly review the facts and circumstances which have led to the current controversy.

The story starts when the Chaddha Committee, which was constituted for revision of the pay scales of teachers in higher education at par with the 6th Pay Commission, came up with a conclusive suggestion for an increment in the superannuation age of teachers from 62 to 65 years with an objective to meet the acute shortage of experienced teachers in state universities. On the basis of this report MHRD formulated a scheme which included pay scales, qualifications, recruitment procedures and covering various other important aspects, one such aspect being the superannuation age. Subsequently, the MHRD and the UGC flashed out various circulars to the education secretaries of States directing them to implement the UGC’s composite scheme in toto failing to which the State Government will have to cease its demand of reimbursement to the extent of 80% of the additional expenditure incurred on the payment of the revised scales. On June 30, 2010 UGC in pursuance of letter from MHRD framed UGC Regulations 2010. These regulation were framed under the powers conferred by clauses (e) and (g) of section 26 of UGC Act, 1956.

Various State Universities across the country in order to avoid the implementation of this regulations claim that this UGC fiat has no binding effect on them as these regulations are mere recommendations and cannot override the State Universities Act enacted by the state legislature under entry 25 of the concurrent list. The same view was upheld by Supreme Court in T.P. George case which has been reiterated in bundle of High Court judgments. However, the author is of the view that in the current educational regime, there has been significant transformation in the work of UGC then and today. Now these regulations are no more mere recommendations. The High Courts in India have failed to appreciate the context in which the Supreme Court ruled in T.P. George and have tried to riposte the judgment of the Supreme Court. The principle of Stare decisis also worked like handcuffs for the High Courts. This has left the following questions unanswered which are of great significance in current scenario. First, whether age of superannuation is a matter which comes within the purview of entry 66 of List 1 of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India? Second, whether the interpretation of the apex Court in T.P. George Case is significantly overruled by subsequent case laws? Third, whether the regulations made by UGC are in the form of delegated legislation and can it override State Legislation? Finally, whether the Court took into consideration the wordings of the regulations which in this case appear to be more than mere recommendations?

The judiciary should take note of the nature of the functions performed by the UGC and at this juncture it is essential that the regulation made by UGC should be given a status more than that of a mere recommendation. Further, these regulations should have universal application throughout the country so that UGC can discharge its constitutional mandate of making provision for the co-ordination and determination of standards in Universities effectively and efficiently. The author expresses his apprehension that by ousting the control of UGC over State Universities, the constitutional purpose for which UGC has been established would fail.

Critical comments would be much appreciated!