LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS

Legal aid in India has evolved over the last few decades since 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution. This paper attempts to provide philosophical underpinnings suggesting how legal aid model has evolved over the years and excogitate a newer trajectory for its future evolution. It delves into we...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: S. Chandra, N. Y. Solanki
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Publshing House V.Ема 2015-01-01
Series:BRICS Law Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.bricslawjournal.com:80/jour/article/view/17
id doaj-f76b4782efc74293bc4a64bd239951ca
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f76b4782efc74293bc4a64bd239951ca2020-11-25T01:08:04ZengPublshing House V.ЕмаBRICS Law Journal2409-90582412-23432015-01-0122688510.21684/2412-2343-2015-2-2-68-8516LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDSS. Chandra0N. Y. Solanki1Jindal Global Law School, SonipatJindal Global Law School, SonipatLegal aid in India has evolved over the last few decades since 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution. This paper attempts to provide philosophical underpinnings suggesting how legal aid model has evolved over the years and excogitate a newer trajectory for its future evolution. It delves into weighing Kant’s imperfect duty justifying a charity based regime and marks a transition to utilitarian model suggesting requirement of institutional need to address issues of basic liberty of ‘access to justice.’ It also spells out Rawls’ principles of justice and attempts to explore their applicability in the Indian context, to chart out a road map for future. While contrasting different models on legal aids, it makes a finding that, India doesn’t accord priority to liberty of access to justice. The Indian Supreme Court has emerged as a bastion of liberty but the finer details of the enactment has been messed up by the Indian lawmakers. The lower compensation to lawyers and lack of alternative incentives in attracting established litigators, testifies this. There is a convergence in Kantian duty of benevolence and Rawls’ liberty principle but in the world of moral relativism, a fair compensation must precede before imposing any obligation on lawyers to take up pro bono matters, as doing so, is likely to compromise their ‘true needs.’http://www.bricslawjournal.com:80/jour/article/view/17legal aidImmanuel KantJohn RawlsIndian Supreme Courtprinciple of fair equality of opportunityliberty of access to justice
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author S. Chandra
N. Y. Solanki
spellingShingle S. Chandra
N. Y. Solanki
LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS
BRICS Law Journal
legal aid
Immanuel Kant
John Rawls
Indian Supreme Court
principle of fair equality of opportunity
liberty of access to justice
author_facet S. Chandra
N. Y. Solanki
author_sort S. Chandra
title LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS
title_short LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS
title_full LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS
title_fullStr LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS
title_full_unstemmed LEGAL AID IN INDIA: RETUNING PHILOSOPHICAL CHORDS
title_sort legal aid in india: retuning philosophical chords
publisher Publshing House V.Ема
series BRICS Law Journal
issn 2409-9058
2412-2343
publishDate 2015-01-01
description Legal aid in India has evolved over the last few decades since 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution. This paper attempts to provide philosophical underpinnings suggesting how legal aid model has evolved over the years and excogitate a newer trajectory for its future evolution. It delves into weighing Kant’s imperfect duty justifying a charity based regime and marks a transition to utilitarian model suggesting requirement of institutional need to address issues of basic liberty of ‘access to justice.’ It also spells out Rawls’ principles of justice and attempts to explore their applicability in the Indian context, to chart out a road map for future. While contrasting different models on legal aids, it makes a finding that, India doesn’t accord priority to liberty of access to justice. The Indian Supreme Court has emerged as a bastion of liberty but the finer details of the enactment has been messed up by the Indian lawmakers. The lower compensation to lawyers and lack of alternative incentives in attracting established litigators, testifies this. There is a convergence in Kantian duty of benevolence and Rawls’ liberty principle but in the world of moral relativism, a fair compensation must precede before imposing any obligation on lawyers to take up pro bono matters, as doing so, is likely to compromise their ‘true needs.’
topic legal aid
Immanuel Kant
John Rawls
Indian Supreme Court
principle of fair equality of opportunity
liberty of access to justice
url http://www.bricslawjournal.com:80/jour/article/view/17
work_keys_str_mv AT schandra legalaidinindiaretuningphilosophicalchords
AT nysolanki legalaidinindiaretuningphilosophicalchords
_version_ 1725184411545108480