International Journal of Law, Culture & Society
The International Journal of Law, Culture & Society (IJLCS) (ISSN: 3139-1974) is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal published by Lex Academia Edutech. Established by distinguished scholars and alumni of leading Indian institutions, including the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) and the National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU), the journal publishes original, high-quality, and interdisciplinary legal research examining the interaction of law with culture, society, technology, governance, business, human rights, and public policy.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the International Journal of Law, Culture & Society (IJLCS) the right of first publication. All published articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, adaptation, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are properly credited. Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted work is original and does not infringe the rights of others.
THE FIFTH CRIME: CAN ECOCIDE SAVE THE PLANET WHERE TREATIES FAILED?
This research article explores the new theory of ecocide as a possible fifth international crime and discusses whether it is appropriate to offer an effective legal solution to the environmental annihilation where the current international treaties have not worked. The paper starts by following the historical development of ecocide, starting in the 1970s due to its impact on the environment, and the application of Agent Orange in the Vietnam War, to the 2021 legal definition offered by the Independent Expert Panel (IEP) to potentially be included in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. It provides a critical examination of the weakness of existing soft-law environmental systems, especially the Paris Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity, in the light of how the lack of sanctions to enforce it and the lack of criminal culpability to individuals has enabled both state and non-state actors to view environmental harm as a cost of doing business. The article also discusses the argument of whether ecocide meets the threshold of gravity needed to qualify as an international crime and whether it fits within the doctrinal framework of the current crimes of international criminal law. It also discusses how the International Criminal Court can be used as a permanent adjudicatory body that can enforce ecocide by using meaningful sentencing policies, and therefore overcoming the deficiencies of administrative penalties. The study also intersects with the wider paradigm shift in international law towards an ecocentric viewpoint, convinced that criminalisation of ecocide is a paradigm shift that would lead to the acknowledgment of the inseparable worth and rights of the ecosystem. Lastly, the paper discusses the critical issues and practical challenges that accompany the idea of making ecocide an international crime, and concludes that the challenges, instead of making it irrelevant, indicate the need to adopt more powerful and enforceable environmental protection mechanisms.
Copyright (c) 2026 Dhriti Mahajan (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
FROM COLONIAL LEGACIES TO INDIGENOUS FUTURES: TRANSFORMING LEGAL EDUCATION FOR TRIBAL RIGHTS PROTECTION IN INDIA
The protection of tribal and Indigenous rights remains a persistent challenge within contemporary legal systems due to the enduring effects of colonialism, structural inequality, and institutional exclusion. Despite growing constitutional and international recognition of Indigenous rights relating to self-determination, land, culture, and political participation, substantial barriers continue to impede their effective realization. This article addresses the question of how legal education can be transformed to strengthen tribal rights protection and Indigenous justice within pluralistic legal systems. Employing a doctrinal and interdisciplinary qualitative methodology, the study analyses constitutional provisions, international legal instruments, Indigenous justice scholarship, legal pluralism, and decolonial theory to examine the relationship between legal education and Indigenous rights protection. The findings reveal that conventional legal education continues to privilege Eurocentric legal traditions while marginalising Indigenous legal orders, customary governance systems, and community-based knowledge frameworks, thereby contributing to the reproduction of structural inequalities within legal institutions. The study further demonstrates that integrating Indigenous legal traditions, cultural competency training, clinical legal education, experiential learning, and community-engaged institutional partnerships can significantly enhance the capacity of legal professionals to engage with Indigenous communities and support tribal sovereignty. The article contributes to contemporary scholarship on Indigenous justice and legal education by proposing a comprehensive decolonial reform framework that repositions Indigenous legal knowledge as a legitimate component of legal education. It argues that a community-responsive and pluralistic model of legal education is essential for advancing Indigenous self-determination, strengthening tribal sovereignty, and promoting equitable access to justice in diverse democratic societies.
Copyright (c) 2026 Vishnuprasad V Menon (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DEEPFAKE CRIMES AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE: EVALUATING INDIA'S LEGAL RESPONSE UNDER THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023
The criminalisation of synthetic media in India has not been a planned phenomenon; it is the result of a nineteenth-century categorisation of media that was designed to address nineteenth-century harms. This article makes a doctrinal analysis of the current legal response to deepfake crimes under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS"), read together with the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026. It argues that the BNS was drafted in the very period in which generative AI was mainstreamed in India, yet was formulated without any awareness of this new category of synthetic media, and hence merely re-numbers rather than resolves the interpretive tension that the Indian Penal Code, 1860 had already shown when confronted with morphed images and voice cloning. The article examines the constitutional underpinnings in Articles 19 and 21, the developing personality and publicity-rights jurisprudence of the Delhi High Court, and a comparative study of the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act and the United States' TAKE IT DOWN Act, to show how India's personation, forgery, defamation and voyeurism provisions together create a disjointed, victim-unfriendly, and largely civil rather than criminal enforcement pathway.
Copyright (c) 2026 Kimika Bhardwaj, Dr. Shruti Goyal (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO MENSTRUAL HEALTH: A CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION
The Supreme Court in its landmark judgment in Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Government of India held that menstrual health is an indispensable aspect of Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Articles 21 Constitution of India. The judgment delivered by a two-judge Bench, affirmed that menstrual hygiene is an essential component of menstrual health, and the latter cannot be realised unless effective measures are taken to meet the former. This case note examines the constitutional reasoning adopted by the Honourable Court and particularly how the Court interpreted the right to menstrual health as an integral facet of the rights to life, equality and free and compulsory education under Articles 21, 14 and 21A, respectively. It further examines how the principles evolved in the Supreme Court’s earlier jurisprudence on the rights to life and free and compulsory education informed the Court’s recognition of the right to menstrual health and hygiene. The note argues that while the judgment marks a significant advancement in the protection and recognition of rights of the young girls, bridging the gap between judicial intent and effective implementation at the grassroots level remains a critical issue in Indian society. By critically evaluating the principles laid down in the judgment and its contribution to the Indian jurisprudence, this case note highlights the dire need to strengthen Menstrual Health Management (MHM) in schools for girl children.
Copyright (c) 2026 Akshita Priyadarshini (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
PERSONALIZED PRICES IN THE DIGITAL MARKETPLACE: A STUDY OF ALGORITHMIC PRICE DISCRIMINATION AND THE CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW
There is a growing usage of data driven algorithms in this digital e-commerce era, enabling sellers on the platforms and platforms itself engaging in the price discrimination and personalised pricing and adjustments in real time. The adoption of these practices though on the surface level appear to be efficient and competitive but raise serious concerns regarding transparency, opacity and violation of consumer rights by leveraging consumers personal data to create such personalised pricing in the digital marketplaces. The paper begins to analyse the challenges posed by the algorithmic price personalisation and goes on to examine the effectiveness of the Consumer Protection Act of India, 2019 to effectively address these challenges. The paper employs a doctrinal approach through comparative lens, to understand the statutory provisions and case laws addressing the issue with reference to e-commerce. The paper further delves into the consideration of interplay of consumer law and allied legal framework including data protection and competition law, to identify the appropriate regulatory framework for algorithmic pricing. The questions answered in the paper are: (i) can personalised pricing be regarded as an unfair trade practice as mentioned in the consumer protection act;(ii) how much transparency in pricing, data use, and segmentation is required to be considered as a violation to consumer’s right to be informed and (iii) what kind of remedies are available and desirable. The paper argues that present consumer protection law already has measures to target the algorithmic price personalisation but a clearer and transparent provisions, guidance and regulatory reforms are required to make protections effective in digital marketplaces. The paper proposes a calibrated approach that is strong transparency and auditability requirements of price algorithms, targeted unfair dealing and discrimination measures, enhanced data governance and pro-active regulatory approach. In conclusion, the paper suggests that harmonisation of consumer protection law with technological oversight is necessary to maintain the market, transparency and fairness while still allowing personalised prices in a regulated manner.
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Sonia Maan (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
THE LIMITS OF LEGAL ARCHITECTURE: HOW TEXTUAL DEFICIENCIES AND POLITICAL CONSTRAINTS INTERACT TO DEFEAT CULTURAL HERITAGE PROTECTION IN ARMED CONFLICT
Cultural heritage destruction in armed conflict is not incidental to war it is frequently a deliberate strategy of identity erasure and ideological domination. Despite a substantial body of international law comprising the 1954 Hague Convention and its Protocols, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and dedicated United Nations Security Council resolutions, systematic destruction continues across Syria, Ukraine, Mali, and Iraq with near-zero criminal accountability. This article argues that these failures arise not from political will deficits alo.ne, nor from legal inadequacy in isolation, but from the interaction between specific textual deficiencies that create exploitation surfaces and the political actors who predictably use them. Three compounding deficits a consent-based jurisdictional architecture that excludes the majority of modern perpetrators by design, the absence of legally binding proactive mechanisms leaving protection entirely reactive, and a prosecutorial framework that structurally subordinates cultural crimes to geopolitical calculation interact and mutually reinforce one another in ways that make accountability for cultural destruction exceptional rather than routine. Through doctrinal analysis of primary instruments and critical examination of four case studies, including the landmark ICC conviction in Prosecutor v Al Mahdi, this article demonstrates that incremental reform cannot resolve these deficits at the pace demanded by modern asymmetric conflict, and proposes three structural interventions targeting the interaction between textual gaps and political exploitation.
Copyright (c) 2026 Rajishkha KMS (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
THE GAVEL WITHOUT GRIP: THE ROME STATUTE, THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, AND THE LIMITS OF GLOBAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE
The International Criminal Court (ICC), created under the 1998 Rome Statute, embodies the international community’s most ambitious project to establish a permanent, impartial mechanism for prosecuting genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. While its legal mandate reflects an intricate balance between state sovereignty and universal accountability, the Court’s institutional identity is equally shaped by symbolic elements. The official emblem of the International Criminal Court consists of scales of justice surrounded by olive branches, representing impartiality and peace. Through an analysis of the Rome Statute’s jurisdiction, complementarity regime, admissibility standards and procedural framework, the paper explores how the ICC is structured to operate independently. It further engages with philosophical lenses—natural law, cosmopolitanism, legal positivism and critical legal studies—to interpret the meaning and limits of the Court’s symbolism. Case studies including Lubanga, Katanga, Ongwen, Al Mahdi, Kenya, Darfur, Afghanistan, Palestine and Myanmar illustrate both the Court’s landmark contributions and its significant operational challenges. The findings reveal that while the ICC has advanced international criminal jurisprudence and strengthened global expectations of accountability, its dependence on state cooperation, selective Security Council referrals, political resistance from powerful non-State Parties and legitimacy critiques particularly from the African Union continue to constrain its effectiveness. Ultimately, the “gavel without grip” remains an aspirational ideal: a powerful symbol of what global justice strives to be, yet not fully realised in practice.
Copyright (c) 2026 Srishti Saxena (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
CYBER-MOB AGGRESSIVITY IN RESPONSE TO ALLEGED SEXUAL OFFENSES: A THEORETICAL EXAMINATION OF ONLINE DISINHIBITION, DEINDIVIDUATION, AND DIGITAL VIGILANTISM
The emergence of digital ecosystems in India has reshaped the nature of public discourse, creating a rich ground for the emergence of cyber-mob aggressivity, especially in response to alleged sexual offenses. With over 800 million internet users and a rapidly expanding social media landscape, India has witnessed a rising tide of digital vigilante cases where anonymous or pseudonymous players collectively pursue online shaming, abuse, and doxing of targeted individuals accused of a crime, often prior to formal legal proceedings. It is often observed that the sense of anonymity, asynchronicity, and invisibility induces users to behave aggressively or vent anger that they would refrain from in real-life situations. It is frequently observed that a loss of self-consciousness or lack thereof among online mobs allows for spontaneous behaviour such as online shaming, hashtag activism, and death threats. The paper depicts these mental constructs though the lens of the R.G. Kar Rape Case (2024), the Dhing Gang Rape Case (2023), and the Unnao Rape Case (2017) and their online reception, shaping public opinion before legal resolution and draws parallels to John Suler's Online Disinhibition Effect, Festinger's Deindividuation Theory, and the developing literature on digital vigilantism and moral panic, situating how cyber-mob action in India is part of a larger trend away from institutional trust towards crowd-sourced justice. These cases are not empirically examined but are provisionally referenced to illustrate how viral storytelling tends to supplant judicial consideration, transposing justice from courtrooms to commentaries. Furthermore, the analysis also explores how algorithms on social media platforms amplify emotive content, reward moral indignation, and build echo chambers that reinforce single-sided narratives, thereby allowing public opinion to descend into punitive virtual trials. This paper highlights, through an analytical synthesis of psychology theory, media research, and legal writing, the imperative to deliver a calibrated reaction protecting freedom of expression while mitigating against cyber vigilante abuse. It concludes by recommending multi-level measures such as platform responsibility, media literacy, and judicial training to maintain constitutional assurances while meeting the demand for justice in the online world.
Copyright (c) 2026 Ridhi Banerjee, Debdeep Das (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
UNDERREPORTING OF CHILD ABUSE: A CRIMINOLOGICAL INQUIRY INTO CRIMINAL JUSTICE BARRIERS
In criminology, official statistics on child abuse are typically considered to represent only a portion of the true prevalence of child abuse. The difference has been explained in terms of the dark figure of crime. This article analyses the obstacles to this disparity in trial outcomes, including mandatory reporting standards, evidentiary rules about competency and corroboration of child witnesses, and institutional structures for investigating and prosecuting child abuse, that discourage or obstruct reporting and proof of child abuse. Drawing on the findings of studies on crime victimisation and disclosure behaviour, the article examines law in India, USA and UK to suggest that aspects of the criminal procedure that burden disproportionately on the child complainant and adult relatives who may report are identifiable as factors contributing to underreporting, rather than just discomfort and familial pressure on children. The article considers scope and boundaries of mandatory reporting regimes and the evidentiary architecture of child testimony. The paper also looks at the powers of law enforcement and prosecutors to determine which reports move to formal investigation. Lastly, it examines the attempts to minimise the trauma of involvement in criminal proceedings by systems. It takes a whole-of-system change, not just one thing at a time, to make a difference in the dark figure of child abuse.
Copyright (c) 2026 Urwashi Nirmalkar, Naish Zameer (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
FROM COMMONS TO CODE: HOW AGENTIC ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS FORCING A POLYCENTRIC REDESIGN OF IP LAW
The digital economy, expected to reach a worth of US $ 24 trillion by late 2025, faces an Incentive-Access Paradox of the kind that is an unavoidable juxtaposition of the difficulty intellectual property frameworks have in coping with the rise of Agentic artificial intelligence and the decentralised architectures that support it. Established anthropocentric doctrines of authorship and inventorship conflict with the products of autonomous machines, thereby engendering concerns about a “Tragedy of the Anti-commons” in which fragmented rights and patent thickets hamper the very innovation they seek to protect. Regulatory efforts around the world are increasingly oriented toward systemic risk management and hybrid licensing regimes. The European Union’s AI Act, which comes into partial effect in August 2025, includes mandates for transparency and copyright compliance for providers of General-Purpose Artificial Intelligence (GPAI). In parallel, the 2025 Directive of the Indian Ministry of Industry and Commerce (DPIIT) expert committee has favored a “mandatory blanket licence” accompanied by statutory remuneration; it has thus effectively sought to balance the disparity in bargaining power between the developer/creator. The judicial frontier has been further identified by US precedent set in 2025, specifically Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta. These decisions characterised training of Large Language Models (LLMs) as “spectacularly transformative” and thus fell within the ambit of fair use. However, the rulings set the transformative process of training apart from unlawful data acquisition, which keeps liability for using pirated sources alive. In an attempt to fill the gap in today’s law, sui generis mechanisms, e.g., Ukraine’s 25-year-long-term economic protection regime for non-original computer-generated works, are emerging as viable alternatives to mainstream copyright law. Developing a resilient digital ecology depends on a polycentric governance structure that addresses the Productivity J-Curve and prevents the enclosure of the digital commons, which is essential for providing legal certainty and supporting the US $6.7 trillion infrastructure investment needed by 2030
Copyright (c) 2026 Pragyesh Yogendra Shrivastav, Mansi Soni (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
WHO IS THE LEGAL PARENT? A CASE REVIEW OF IN RE BABY M AND THE EVOLUTION OF SURROGACY LAW IN THE UNITED STATES
Surrogacy has transformed the way many individuals and couples build families, especially those who cannot conceive or carry a pregnancy. Despite its growing acceptance, surrogacy continues to raise difficult legal questions about who should be recognized as a child's legal parent when biological, genetic, gestational, and intended parenthood do not belong to the same person. One of the most influential cases in this area is In re Baby M (1988), which marked the first major judicial examination of commercial surrogacy in the United States. Although decided more than thirty years ago, the case continues to influence legal discussions on parenthood, reproductive autonomy, and the enforceability of surrogacy agreements. This article reviews In re Baby M and examines its lasting impact on the development of surrogacy law in the United States. It analyzes the facts of the case, the reasoning of the New Jersey Supreme Court, and the legal principles established by the judgment. The article further explores how later judicial decisions and legislative reforms have responded to the issues raised in Baby M, especially the recognition of intended parents, the regulation of gestational surrogacy, and the protection of children's welfare. A comparative discussion of selected jurisdictions demonstrates that clearer statutory regulation has reduced many of the legal uncertainties that continue to exist in parts of the United States. The article argues that although In re Baby M remains a landmark decision, developments in assisted reproductive technology require a more modern legal framework capable of balancing reproductive autonomy, contractual certainty, and the best interests of the child. It concludes that greater consistency in surrogacy regulation is necessary to provide legal certainty for surrogate mothers, intended parents, healthcare professionals, and children born through assisted reproduction.
Copyright (c) 2026 Oghenehoro Evi Eni (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
THE INDIAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS REGIME UNDER SCRUTINY - PATENT PROTECTION, PUBLIC INTEREST SAFEGUARDS, AND THE LIMITS OF TRIPS COMPLIANCE
The Indian intellectual property rights (IPR) system is an innovative approach to protecting both public welfare and innovation incentives, particularly in sectors such as pharmaceuticals and agriculture. As a member state of the TRIPS Agreement, India has made significant changes to its patent-related legislation, especially the amendments of the Patents Act of 1970. These changes have arguably increased the number of patents available, providing India with the ability to adjust its legislation to fit the other major economies of the world, but have also increased the criticism surrounding this policy change, including the accessibility of the right to technology and medicine, the right to protect traditional knowledge, and right to own and control the technology. This paper critically evaluates India’s patent framework, focusing on its use of TRIPS flexibilities, including compulsory licensing and strict patentability standards under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970. This research focuses on India’s ability to remain neutral or pro-development in the realm of patents in a world where developed nations and large corporations have significant power and influence. Using the legal framework and applicable rulings, this research analyzes the gaps between the control of the developed world and needs of the developing world. This research acknowledges that India has developed a sophisticated, flexible patent system, but has not yet developed an effective patent system that balances equitable access, technology adaptation, and circumvention of TRIPS-plus requirements. India affords an important example of developing countries managing international obligations and domestic welfare concerns. The paper argues that while India has successfully leveraged TRIPS flexibilities, structural inefficiencies and geopolitical pressures continue to limit its effectiveness. The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed structural inequities in global access to medicines, reinforcing the importance of TRIPS flexibilities.
Copyright (c) 2026 Vartika Goyal (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN INDIA: A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CARE AND DELINQUENCY
‘Care’ is not something involved only with family or older people. The Indian justice system is one of those institutions that uses ‘care’ as a component of reformation, for example, the Juvenile Justice System in India. The Juvenile Justice System in India went through a substantial change. The present Juvenile Justice Act (JJA)-2015 is more structured and organized than the past. The latest juvenile justice has spread in two ways: one with children who need protection, and the second with children in conflict with the law. In both cases of children, at the theoretical and practical level, the justice system is more lenient than the adult justice system, with more care and more focused on rehabilitation. Although the Indian adult justice system also talks about reformation, and this thing is practically impossible without care, in the cases of children's justice, this is softer in nature and prone to less punishment. The best interest in juvenile justice in India is children’s security, both physically and emotionally. This paper does not discuss grand reality or does not focus on what really Indian juvenile justice parameters are, rather it keeps focus on how the ‘care’ notion is attached with the offender, deviant, delinquent system. The current research paper examines the underlying pathways that are ‘outside of home and family care’ of children included in the criminal justice system of India.
Copyright (c) 2026 Banashree Ghosal, Dr. Chandrani Chattopadhyay (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
THE ARCHITECTURE OF AMBIVALENCE: LAW, THE QUEER COMMUNITY, AND THE STRUCTURAL CONTRADICTIONS OF RIGHTS RECOGNITION IN INDIA
India’s legal framework for queer persons is defined by a paradox that this article terms “architectured ambivalence”: the state has progressively extended constitutional recognition to queer identity through landmark decisions from NALSA v. Union of India (2014) to Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) and Supriyo v. Union of India (2023), while simultaneously constructing a legislative architecture that contradicts, erodes, or simply refuses to implement what those decisions require. The article argues that this pattern is not a failure of implementation but a structurally coherent arrangement constituted by three features: doctrinal abundance alongside legislative poverty, a systematic asymmetry by which the state has been willing to decriminalise queer identity but unwilling to extend the civil infrastructure that makes that identity liveable, and epistemic erasure at the implementation stage by which transformative judicial directions are hollowed out through administrative and legislative processes. Drawing on the critical scholarship of Narrain, Gupta, Jain, and Agarwal, and examining the replacement of the Indian Penal Code by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in 2024 and the Transgender Persons Amendment Bill of 2026, the article demonstrates that the most consequential recent developments for queer persons in India have been legislative retreats, not constitutional advances. The article concludes with a critical legislative programme aimed at bridging the gap between constitutional doctrine and lived reality.
Copyright (c) 2026 Anupriya Kumari (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DATA MARKETS AND STATE SURVEILLANCE: A COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL INQUIRY
In the recent world personal data has become a strategic asset due to the quick development of the data markets and algorithmic governance, rapidly expanding the scope of state surveillance in constitutional democracies. This development raises a fundamental constitutional question that how should legal orders balance the demands the data-driven governance with ensuring the protection of fundamental rights most specifically, right to privacy in a political economy increasingly shaped by the data extraction and the logic of surveillance capitalism?1 This paper conducts a comparative constitutional analysis of the India, Australia and the United States, to examine whether existing legal regulations have the structural potential to significantly limit the convergence between corporate data power and state authority. The analysis is intentionally placed within the larger political economy of data markets, emphasizing the institutional and democratic interests associated with these changes. Although the Indian constitutional system has significantly recognized privacy as a fundamental right, demonstrates notable doctrinal dynamism, However the boundaries of this recognition are progressively being strained by massive state-run digital infrastructures. The Australian framework relies on legislative mechanisms that although flexible, are structurally vulnerable to executive overreach since it lacks an explicit constitutional guarantee. In United States, Fourth Amendment law which has long been seen as a pillar of privacy protection, is becoming more inadequate in addressing the dual pressure of widespread private sector data aggregation and digital surveillance. In all three jurisdictions, due to the increasing coupling of public governance with surveillance capitalism has operated to normalize pervasive monitoring as a method of state administration. This paper examines that existing regulatory frameworks are not adequately equipped to address the governance realities brought about by the data driven power. As a result, it promotes the development of a renewed framework of digital constitutionalism, one that institutionalize strong data sovereignty as a foundational value and focuses on rigid mechanisms of democratic accountability within the governance of personal data.
Copyright (c) 2026 Dipisha Chelani, Ankit Singh Baghel (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
RECONCILING TAX ENFORCEMENT AND FINANCIAL CONFIDENTIALITY: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SECTION 59 OF KENYA’S TAX PROCEDURES ACT, 2015
The right to swing your fist ends where the other person’s nose begins. The relationship between a government and its taxpayers with regard to financial confidentiality and data protection is of a similar nature. This article critically examines the implications of Section 59 of the Tax Procedures Act (TPA) on the principle of financial confidentiality in Kenya. This provision allows the disclosure of taxpayers’ sensitive information to third parties for purposes of tax compliance. This raises significant concerns regarding the delicate balance between promoting tax compliance and safeguarding the right to financial privacy. The article highlights the potential constitutional conflicts arising from such disclosures, particularly concerning data held by financial institutions, and discusses how this could undermine established legal protections and individual rights enshrined under Article 31 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, as well as in the Data Protection Act 2019. Through a detailed analysis, and comparative evaluation of the Europeans Union’s Approach to financial confidentiality, United Kingdom’s approach and South Africa Approach, the article argues that the current legislative framework, which allows blanket third-party disclosures, may violate constitutional safeguards against unwarranted invasions of privacy. It advocates for a comprehensive reassessment of the relevant provisions within the TPA, emphasising the need for enhanced judicial oversight and robust data protection measures. By proposing amendments to the legislation, the article seeks to ensure that individual rights are adequately protected while maintaining effective tax administration.
Copyright (c) 2026 George Mbaye (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
ALGORITHMIC EVIDENCE IN THE DOCK: EXAMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF AIGENERATED RECORDS UNDER THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023 AND THE CASE FOR A DEDICATED NORMATIVE FRAMEWORK
What may a court lawfully treat as established fact, and how ought it arrive at that conclusion? These are old questions, but artificial intelligence has given them a sharper edge than they have had for some time. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 from 1 July 2024 - India's most significant reconfiguration of evidentiary law since the colonial period. Its reforms are real: electronic records are treated more coherently, expert evidence is better structured, and the certification regime is clarified. Yet the BSA was designed to answer a prior generation of problems. When Parliament enacted it, the governing concern was whether a stored or transmitted digital record had been altered in transit. Today's courts face something different: evidence that a machine did not merely store or convey but actively produced. A deepfake reconstructing a conversation, a recidivism score computed from demographic proxies, a DNA mixture resolved by probabilistic software - none of these maps cleanly onto the BSA's certification-based architecture. This article contends that the existing framework is both doctrinally inadequate and practically unworkable for this category of evidence. It draws on comparative law from the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, together with scholarship in AI governance and legal epistemology, to develop a normative framework resting on three claims: that AI-generated evidence warrants a structured judicial reliability inquiry before admission; that Parliament must carve out a discrete statutory category with mandatory disclosure requirements; and that Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution place substantive limits on the judicial deployment of algorithmic outputs. The article closes with specific proposals for legislative amendment and practice directions.
Copyright (c) 2026 Aniruddh Sachin Bajaj, Rishish Singh (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
COMPUTATIONAL LEGAL DIAGNOSTICS AND THE LIMITS OF HUMAN LEGAL REASONING
Recent scholarship on artificial intelligence and law has primarily examined the use of AI to support legal decision-making, automate legal tasks, or expand access to legal services. This article advances a different analytical orientation by conceptualizing AI as a diagnostic instrument for examining the internal structure of legal systems themselves. Drawing on interdisciplinary insights from law, socio-legal studies, and computational analysis, the article develops the concept of computational legal diagnostics to describe the use of AI techniques in identifying normative inconsistencies, regulatory overlaps, and enforcement gaps that are difficult to detect through doctrinal legal reasoning alone. Rather than treating law as a set of rules to be applied, this approach analyzes law as a complex institutional system characterized by layered norm production and uneven implementation. Through illustrative examples drawn from a multi-tiered legal context in the Global South, the article demonstrates how AI-assisted analysis can reveal structural patterns of legal fragmentation and institutional bias embedded in contemporary regulatory frameworks. The article concludes by discussing the implications of this diagnostic use of AI for legal reform, institutional design, and the governance of AI in law, emphasizing that such systems should complement rather than replace human legal interpretation and democratic accountability.
Copyright (c) 2026 Duong Xuan Vinh, Nguyen Quang Dat (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Ethical Hacking: A Framework for Automated Threat Mitigation and Defensive Security
Digital ecosystems are growing rapidly as more people turn to artificial intelligence in their everyday lives. As a result, high-tech cyber threats have emerged, fundamentally reshaping the vision of cybersecurity. Ethical hacking has become a necessary tool for combating cybercrime, and the conventional approach used by ethical hackers is often insufficient. Consequently, AI-based automation and real-time threat prevention are revolutionising ethical hacking. This article provides a clear indication of the development of ethical hacking in the age of artificial intelligence and, more specifically, automated threat mitigation. It also examines how AI technologies have changed defensive cybersecurity practices and assesses the ethical and legal issues that autonomous security systems present to the contemporary cyber-legal landscape. The research approach used is a doctrinal and analytical design, which implies a detailed analysis of the interdisciplinary literature on AI, cybersecurity and ethical hacking, along with a review of the current international standards of cybersecurity and new AI regulation systems. The practical uses of AI-driven automated threat mitigation are addressed through selected case studies and industry practices. Moreover, the analysis of AI reveals that it positively affects ethical hacking, as it enables complete monitoring, threat recognition, and automatic responses. Nonetheless, it also uncovers the most vital problems associated with accountability, clarity, information bias, and susceptibility to adversarial attacks in AI. Automated mitigation systems are effective, but they need organised human monitoring to avoid ethical and legal non-compliance. Therefore, hybrid solutions for ethical hacking, which involve automation and human decision-making with AI, should be developed. On the legal front, the study illuminates the equilibrium of AI-powered cybersecurity in data security legislation, the development of AI security laws and regulations, and in international security frameworks. Ethical governance frameworks must be put in place to achieve responsible use of autonomous security technologies. The article concludes that AIbased automated threat mitigation may be used to enhance cybersecurity resilience, but its responsible adoption would involve hybrid designs that implement automation in ethical governance and legal compliance.
Copyright (c) 2026 Aranya Nath, Gautami Chakravarty (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DISENFRANCHISING THE INNOCENT? A CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF UNDERTRIAL PRISONERS’ VOTING RIGHTS IN INDIA
The right to vote sits at the heart of democratic participation and political equality in any constitutional democracy. In India, undertrial prisoners still can't cast their votes, thanks to Section 62(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. This law bars anyone held in prison or lawful police custody from voting, even though undertrials are presumed innocent until proven guilty. That raises a real constitutional problem: Does stripping undertrial prisoners of their voting rights fit with the guarantees of equality, dignity, and democratic participation promised by Articles 14, 21, and 326 of the Indian Constitution? This article gets into the details, questioning whether this blanket ban is really justified. It digs into judicial interpretations, especially the logic behind Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Union of India, and lays out how the current rules restrict democratic rights far too much, without properly weighing state interests against constitutional principles. Looking beyond India, the piece explores how countries like Canada, South Africa, the UK, and the US are thinking about prisoner voting, showing that global standards are shifting. The paper also highlights deeper problems in India’s criminal justice system—poverty-driven incarceration, endless undertrial detention—and argues that excluding undertrials from elections only worsens democratic marginalisation. It wraps up by suggesting reforms: amend Section 62(5), add postal ballot options, and urge courts to rethink total disenfranchisement. These steps would help Indian electoral law catch up with constitutional ideals of inclusion and political equality.
Copyright (c) 2026 Nada bi (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DOWRY DEATH AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE & DIGNITY: EXAMINING CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS UNDER ARTICLE 21
Dowry death nowadays has become a very persistent problem in the Indian Marriage institution. Dowry a ritual which is so deeply rooted in the society which originally began as a safeguard for women’s financial security in male dominated societies where daughters were excluded from inheriting ancestral property have now become graveyard for the women in the society. Subjecting a woman to such harassment leading to her loss of life driven by physical violence leading to suicide due to coercive financial demand ultimately curtailing Article 21. This paper examines the meaning, cause, and propelling factors behind such dowry death. It analyses the constitutional safeguard in form of Fundamental rights, Directive principles of state policy and fundamental duties under Article 14,15 and 21 in the constitution of India and reviews the existing legal framework where dowry deaths are prosecuted under Bhartiya Nyaya Sahinta,2023 through the study of landmark Supreme Court judgments and recent case studies, the paper highlights the role of the judiciary in protecting individual autonomy and condemning dowry based violence. It further emphasizes the urgent need for stricter implication of legislation and broader social reform to ensure that constitutional morality prevails over regressive cultural practices.
Copyright (c) 2026 Anmol Tripathi, Vijayshree (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DIGITAL ANNEXATION AND FIDUCIARY TRUST: ALGORITHMIC PERSECUTION AND SAFEGUARDING OF IDENTITY IN CONFLICT ZONES
State succession in the present world is not a change of territory only, but a “digital annexation” of the identity of the population. The disintegration of the Republic of Artsakh in 2023 led to a significant problem in international law concerning the transition of digital infrastructure to Azerbaijan and the change of administrative data into a tool of systemic exclusion, which is the focus of this article. Initially considering state archives as “war trophies, “ the paper suggests that a successor state assumes a permanent, fiduciary obligation to safeguard the “Digital Self” of the population being taken over. This is a direct consequence of how fundamental data protection is for the 21st century; in a digitalized world, personal data is the basis for “the right to have rights.” Here, data protection is not only about privacy but also about physical safety, legal personhood, and the prevention of “Digital erasure.” When people cannot show who they are, they are unable to own property or seek legal remedy and, in the eyes of the international community, become “legal ghosts.” The report unveils a widespread betrayal of the trust through the seizure of Armenian civil registries, containing 120,000 refugee records, that were found in Azerbaijan's monitoring platform (MIRAS). This platform means “Digital Refoulement” - deliberately using old databases for screening, identifying, and even excluding people at checkpoints, such as Hakari Bridge, based on past or military records. The successor states use “Algorithmic Persecution” to automatically deny entry, resulting in the denial of the physical Right of Return, which is the very foundation of the ICJ ruling. Moreover, the paper discusses “Digital Erasure” - the intentional removal of Armenian names from worldwide digital maps - as the ultimate stage of ethnic cleansing, which mentally erases the displaced from the world's collective memory. To address this issue, the paper suggests an extreme reform of the international digital governance framework, particularly through the creation of a dedicated United Nations body for data protection in aggressive and war-torn areas. These organizations would take on the role of neutral international watchdogs and help confirm that the registries are accurate and that the confidentiality of the information is protected. As a result, digital information could be recognized legally at the same level as physical records. The article concludes by emphasizing that protecting digital archives is a matter of human rights; failing that, the history of a community is transformed into a tool for its permanent erasure both legally and socially.
Copyright (c) 2026 Arun Kumar Mahilane, R. Tejeswini (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
THE PERMANENCE PARADOX: PROLONGED OCCUPATION, AND SUSPENDED SOVEREIGNTY IN THE GOLAN HEIGHTS
A territory can be occupied for decades, condemned by the world, and still never returned, and international law has no answer for that. The law prohibits the acquisition of territory by force. Israel acquired the Golan Heights by force in 1967, annexed it in 1981, and expanded it in 2024. The law has not changed. The territory has not moved. Something, clearly, is broken. The Golan Heights case, involving disputes between Israel and Syria, represents one of the longest-standing cases under international law. Israel has occupied the region since the Six-Day War in 1967 and extended its occupation of the area once again in December 2024 in view of the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria. The Golan Heights case is located precisely at the interface between the aspirational qualities of international law and the harsher realities of geopolitics. In this paper, we contend that despite the continued demise of the state sovereignty of Syria, the Golan Heights will remain a piece of territory that is internationally classified as Syrian territory and subject to the Israeli occupation. This analysis implies that there remains a mounting contradiction between the rules of international law and the practicalities of geopolitics, and an interesting question that arises out of this is whether international law can regulate the issue of protracted occupation. This paper also covers arguments on the human dimension of occupation, especially the citizenship and identity crisis that the Druze population of the Golan faces. The paper underlines the phenomenon by which prolonged occupation, though never expressly converting into sovereignty under international law, gradually acquires the functional character of sovereignty in practice. It terms that phenomenon as ‘permanence paradox’. We have further tried to situate the Golan Heights dispute within the broader structural transformation of the international order, where the Westphalian logic of territorial boundaries is increasingly challenged by the power-assertive behaviour of dominance-seeking regional states. In such an environment, the concept of nation-state appears so futile and no state, especially militarily vulnerable, can rely on boundaries to define itself. Despite numerous General Assembly and Security Council resolutions affirming the illegality of the occupation, and despite near-universal international consensus, with the exception of the US, the Golan Heights remains occupied Syrian territory.
Copyright (c) 2026 Aman Aryan, Ananya Pandey (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
BEYOND THE CRIME: SECONDARY VICTIMISATION OF RAPE SURVIVORS IN INDIA
This paper examines the phenomenon of secondary victimization faced by survivors of sexual assault within India’s criminal justice system, arguing that the legal process often inflicts a second layer of harm beyond the original crime. Drawing on the neurobiology of trauma, the paper explains how trauma disrupts memory, behaviour, and emotional expression, making survivors’ responses appear inconsistent with the expectations of police, doctors, prosecutors, and judges. It critiques the persistence of the “ideal victim” stereotype, which privileges a narrow and unrealistic image of victimhood shaped by patriarchal and cultural notions of purity, honour, and credibility. The paper further shows how institutional hostility manifests at multiple stages: during FIR registration, medical examination, investigation, crossexamination, and media reporting. These practices not only undermine the survivor’s dignity and privacy but also shift the burden of proof onto the complainant, thereby distorting the presumption of innocence and violating constitutional guarantees under Article 21. By engaging with recent judicial observations and contemporary cases, the paper highlights how procedural failures and identity disclosures contribute to social death, psychological breakdown, and in some cases, suicide. It concludes that meaningful gender justice requires trauma-informed policing, mandatory use of Vulnerable Witness Deposition Centres, recorded single-point testimonies, strict anonymity protections, and a shift from a purely punitive framework to one that includes state-backed psychological rehabilitation. Only then can the justice system cease to function as a secondary abuser and begin to operate as a genuine site of healing and protection.
Copyright (c) 2026 Humaira Khanam, Krupa Nishar (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
FROM SELF-IDENTIFICATION TO STATE RECOGNITION: THE CHANGING LEGAL LANDSCAPE OF TRANSGENDER RIGHTS IN INDIA
There have been substantial developments in the domain of jurisprudence regarding constitutional acceptance of gender identity over the last decade. It was held by the Supreme Court of India in the case of National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014), it is one such important landmark decision which held that the right of an individual to determine his or her own gender is part of the right of personal liberty and dignity protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. However, the legislative trajectory following in these matters shows the gradual weakening of the concept of selfidentification and personal liberty. Even though the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, passed in 2019 faced several criticism for incorporating state-administered certification measures that negated some aspects of NALSA guidelines, the recently passed Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026 heralds a much more significant move away from the earlier approach. Indeed, this new law in making marks a complete paradigm shift from the existing rights-based and autonomy-driven model of identity recognition towards one that is essentially state-controlled and conditional. This study analyzes the constitutional ramifications of this paradigm shift along three major axes: first, the restriction on self-identification as a fundamental right; second, the consequent shrinking of protection for transgender people; and third, identity recognition process based on bureaucratization, making individual dignity dependent on administrative approval. In addition, the paper highlights how these developments raise serious constitutional questions under Articles 14, 19, and 21, suggesting that the amendment act not only fails to promote the constitutional values set forth in the NALSA judgment but may lead to the perpetuation of systemic discrimination by making individual identity dependent on the whims of the state.
Copyright (c) 2026 Tanisha Mitra, Alishba Sheikh (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
CLIMATE JUSTICE IN INDIA: THE EVOLVING ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION
The escalating global climate crisis has led to a surge in climate change litigation, which has become a potent means of ensuring environmental responsibility and shaping policies worldwide. This research paper analyses the significant role of the Indian judiciary in tackling the urgent challenges posed by climate change, focusing on landmark cases and the development of legal frameworks. This study explores the intersection of judicial activism, public interest litigation, and rights-based approaches that highlight the judiciary’s dedication to environmental accountability. This paper examines key judicial decisions, illustrating how Indian courts have interpreted constitutional provisions and international principles to protect environmental rights and advance sustainable development. This paper seeks to enhance the current discussion on climate justice in India, highlighting the essential role of the judiciary in promoting a balanced strategy for development and conservation amid global environmental challenges. This article also conducts a comparative analysis of climate change litigation in India with other nations which have different legal traditions, environmental policies, and levels of climate vulnerability. This an analysis of significant cases and different judicial approaches, this research uncovers the intricate relationship between domestic legal systems, international commitments, and the impact of public interest litigation on the development of climate justice. Known for its dedication to upholding both domestic law and European Union environmental directives, the United Kingdom presents a unique perspective on the integration of climate commitments within a common law framework. This showcases the judiciary’s expanding role in addressing human rights issues related to climate change. India, on the other hand, highlights the significant role of public interest litigation in a developing country context. This article takes a close look at the procedural and substantive aspects of climate litigation in different jurisdictions while also exploring the wider implications for global climate governance. This article provides a comprehensive analysis on the way courts in these countries interpret scientific evidence, apply international environmental principles, and respond to the challenges of climate change amidst political and economic pressures. In addition, this research uncovers new trends, obstacles, and potential in climate litigation, suggesting a framework to improve judicial collaboration and promote a more unified global approach to climate justice.
Copyright (c) 2026 Harshith Sai Boddu (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
BETWEEN PROMISE AND PRACTICE: THE EQUALITY GAP IN LAWS FOR SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES, TRANSGENDER PERSONS AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
The Constitution of India guarantees equality before law. The idea of equality is one of the most important principles in law and democracy. Our Constitution allows special provisions for disadvantaged, disabled, backward classes and gender minority individuals. Nevertheless, there is a huge downfall in what legislations aims at and what people actually experience in reality. Due to these disparities the socially disadvantaged communities suffer discrimination in everyday life. Discrimination in India is deeply rooted in patriarchal bias, rigid caste system, religious tensions etc. To overcome this long-standing disparity, India needs effective enforcement, comprehensive legislation, strengthened institutional framework and awareness. Equality must be evident from paper to practice. India has enacted several legislations to prevent discrimination against marginalised communities such as Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, The Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019. These statutes aim to ensure substantive equality rather than formal equality, which means promoting practice of equality in real world. However, challenges such as weak implementation, lack of awareness and limited access to justice reduce their effectiveness. This paper critically examines the gap between legal promises and actual practice. Even though, India has a strong legal framework, there exist a decline in implementation, awareness and access to justice. Real equality requires better implementation, greater public awareness and easy access to justice. Bridging this gap is necessary to ensure that equality becomes a lived reality and not just a written promise in law.
Copyright (c) 2026 Akhila Benny, Aparna T Babu (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DUAL-VICTIMISATION IN THE AGE OF AI-GENERATED DEEPFAKES: PERSONALITY RIGHTS VIOLATION & PUBLIC DECEPTION
The sudden rise of deepfake technology, is one of the results of successful Artificial Intelligence (AI) transformation. Today, the deepfake technology has dual-use of showcasing creativity alongside fabricating media. While its initial use was confined to entertainment, its misuse in defamation, privacy violations, manipulation, and fraud has raised significant legal and societal challenges worldwide. The misinformation spreading across the social media platforms has created an urgent need for regulatory intervention and a focus on ethical standards. As tools to create deepfakes become more accessible, they are being used to harm people every day. The paper employs a case study approach to examine the modus operandi of deepfake scams and their associated financial, political, and societal harms. It reveals that such AI-generated content has the potential to undermine public trust in individuals and institutions. The findings indicate that although these deepfake scams do not cause direct physical harm, they influence decision-making, manipulate perceptions, and erode trust. The paper further introduces the concept of dual-victimisation, highlighting that perpetrators target celebrities for their likeness, and the general public becomes the ultimate victim through deception. Deepfake technology gives rise to various challenges including technological, psychological, societal, and legal. The paper applies a doctrinal approach along with content analysis to examine judicial pronouncements and the legal positioning of AI-driven deepfake scams. The findings reveal multiple factors that facilitate the successful execution of the fraud, such as consumer awareness, institutional safeguards, and Indian legal frameworks. The paper concludes with recommendations to promote AI governance, enhance detection mechanisms, and increase international cooperation to expand protection in digital environments.
Copyright (c) 2026 Himanshi Jain (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
LEGAL SANCTITY OF TARIFFS UNDER COMPARATIVE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Tariffs remain one of the most legally significant instruments of state control over cross-border commerce. Although modern trade discourse often characterizes tariffs as economically distortive or politically regressive, positive law does not treat them as inherently illegitimate. On the contrary, tariffs occupy a recognized position within domestic constitutional orders, statutory customs frameworks, and international trade law. This article examines the legal sanctity of tariffs under comparative and international law and argues that tariffs derive legitimacy not from unrestricted sovereignty, but from lawful authority exercised within a layered normative framework. At the domestic level, tariff power must be traceable to constitutional allocation, statutory delegation, or treaty-based institutional competence. At the international level, tariffs must conform to multilateral disciplines, especially boundrate commitments and non-discrimination norms under the GATT/WTO framework, unless justified through recognized exceptions or trade-remedy regimes. Through a comparative analysis of the United States, the European Union, and India, this article demonstrates that distinct legal systems validate tariff power through different institutional pathways while reaching a common conclusion: tariffs are legitimate when imposed through law. The article also examines anti-dumping duties, safeguard measures, national security-based trade restrictions, and trade restrictions linked to the United Nations Charter. It concludes that the true legal sanctity of tariffs lies in their character as rule-governed instruments of public authority.
Copyright (c) 2026 Shubhada Patil (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
TO WHAT EXTENT IS FAMILY REUNIFICATION FOR ASYLUM SEEKERS GOING TO BE IMPACTED AS A RESULT OF BREXIT?
This paper provides a legislative review of family reunification mechanisms for asylum seekers in the United Kingdom, examining the extent to which Brexit affects these frameworks. It focuses on the loss of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), particularly the Dublin Regulation, and situates the issue within the broader context of international refugee law, including the 1951 Refugee Convention. The analysis evaluates both the procedural and practical consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from EU asylum mechanisms. It demonstrates that, although the Dublin Regulation established a formal legal route for reunification—most notably through “take charge” and “take back” procedures—its quantitative effectiveness was limited, with low transfer success rates and minimal impact on overall reunification outcomes. The paper further considers legislative and policy developments following Brexit, including the Immigration and Social Security Coordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 and related government proposals. It argues that, while Brexit removes an established legal and procedural framework, this loss does not significantly affect reunification outcomes in numerical terms. However, it introduces greater legal uncertainty and restricts access to safe and structured reunification routes, particularly for vulnerable groups such as unaccompanied minors. The rejection of the Dubs Amendment and the introduction of temporary protection regimes are critically assessed as missed legislative opportunities to improve reunification pathways. The paper concludes that effective reform requires structured cooperation with the European Union or key Member States, alongside more flexible evidentiary standards and expanded legal routes. While Brexit alters the legal architecture governing reunification, its primary impact lies in the legislative and policy choices that follow rather than in the removal of CEAS mechanisms alone.
Copyright (c) 2026 Animan Vaibhav Sharma (Author) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0