DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Chandra, S. | en |
dc.contributor.author | Solanki, N. | en |
dc.contributor.editor | Maleshin, D. | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-12-16T09:30:11Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-12-16T09:30:11Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Chandra, S. Legal aid in India: retuning philosophical chords / S. Chandra, N. Solanki // BRICS Law Journal / chief editor D. Maleshin; deputy chief editor S. Marochkin; executive editor E. Gladun. – 2015. – Vol. 2, No. 2. – P. 68-85. | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 2412-2343 | online |
dc.identifier.issn | 2409-9058 | print |
dc.description.abstract | 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 aconvergence 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’. | en |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en |
dc.language | en | en |
dc.publisher | Publishing House V.Ема | en |
dc.relation.ispartof | BRICS Law Journal. – 2015. – T. 2, Vol. 2 | en |
dc.rights | Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms: Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. | en |
dc.rights | Авторы, публикующие в данном журнале, соглашаются со следующим: Авторы сохраняют за собой авторские права на работу и предоставляют журналу право первой публикации работы на условиях лицензии Creative Commons Attribution License, которая позволяет другим распространять данную работу с обязательным сохранением ссылок на авторов оригинальной работы и оригинальную публикацию в этом журнале. Авторы сохраняют право заключать отдельные контрактные договорённости, касающиеся не-эксклюзивного распространения версии работы в опубликованном здесь виде (например, размещение ее в институтском хранилище, публикацию в книге), со ссылкой на ее оригинальную публикацию в этом журнале. Авторы имеют право размещать их работу в сети Интернет (например в институтском хранилище или персональном сайте) до и во время процесса рассмотрения ее данным журналом, так как это может привести к продуктивному обсуждению и большему количеству ссылок на данную работу. | ru |
dc.subject | Indian Supreme Court | en |
dc.subject | principle of fair equality of opportunity | en |
dc.subject | legal aid | en |
dc.subject | liberty of access to justice | en |
dc.subject | Immanuel Kant | en |
dc.subject | John Rawls | en |
dc.title | Legal aid in India: returning philosophical chords | en |
dc.title.alternative | Юридическая помощь в Индии: возвращение философских аккордов | ru |
dc.type | Article | en |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | en |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | en |
local.description.firstpage | 68 | |
local.description.lastpage | 85 | |
local.issue | 2 | |
local.volume | 2 | |
local.identifier.uuid | 74e18629-b7e7-4a19-8c76-b5e02ebb61e5 | - |
local.identifier.handle | ru-tsu/16695 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.21684/2412-2343-2015-2-2-68-85 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.21684/2412-2343-2015-2-2 | |
Appears in Collections: | BRICS Law Journal
|