Download the Speeches of all Hon'ble Chief Justices & Judges in ...

ights standards of the Indian Constitution. Thus, for instance, the Supreme Court of India held in S. N. Mukherjee v.Union of India, (1990) 4 Supreme Court Cases 594, para. 42:“This Court under Article 32 and the [State] High Courts under Article 226 [of the Constitution] have, however, the powerof judicial review in respect of proceedings subsequent thereto [i.e., in respect of the court martial proceedings] and cangrant appropriate relief if the said proceedings have resulted in denial of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III ofthe Constitution or if the said proceedings suffer from a jurisdictional error.”India became party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims in 1950 (it has not yet become partyto the 1977 Additional Protocols), and incorporated them into its statute book through the Geneva Conventions Act, 1960.The Statement of Objects and Reasons made by the government while introducing the bill for this enactment explained thatthe enactment was required because it was expected of India as a party to the conventions to provide for punishment of“grave breaches” referred to in Article 50 of the First Geneva Convention and equivalent articles of the succeedingConventions; conferment of jurisdiction on our courts to try offences under these Conventions, even when committed byforeigners outside India; extension of the protection given under the existing law to the emblem of the red cross and to thetwo other emblems, namely, the red crescent on a white ground and the red lion and sun on a white ground.The Constitution of India makes some of the fundamental rights available to “all persons”, not merely to Indian nationals.Thus in the Chakma Refugees cases [32] the Supreme Court of India specifically held that the Article 21 guarantee of theright to life and personal liberty is applicable to foreigners as well, and that the Indian State has an obligation to protect thelife and personal liberty of even refugees if they have been admitted into the Indian territory. As applied by the IndianSupreme Court, Article 21 encompasses the whole gamut of protection of the person and dignity of an individual, and thereference to “personal liberty” covers most essentials of criminal jurisprudence.The view of those who doubt that international law can rightly be called law at all because of lack of enforceability cannotbe brushed aside. It is a view that has engaged the concern of jurists for quite some time. It is however fitting to recognizethe fact that, gradually, international law of the same character as law as municipal law may not have been attained yet. Itmay even be sometime before that ideal is achieved. However, the movement towards the achievement of a world legalorder is manifest. Quite apart from this important conference whose signal achievement is to sensitize the internationalcommunity to the need to strengthen international law and make it truly ‘law’ in character, there is the growing number ofinternational multilateral treaties, conventions and agreements and regional groupings which have prepared states for thetime when, in its fullness, international law will demand that states submit more of their sovereignty.Although a full world legal order has not yet been achieved, it is manifest that in several areas of international cooperationthe time may not be distant that a world legal order may emerge. In recent times we have witnessed the development ofinternational efforts to curb trans-border crimes, a greater commitment of the international community to prosecute crimesagainst humanity and establishment of tribunals to try international crimes. These, in may view, given the will of the internationalcommunity, are fore-runners to a full-fledged world legal order.Today, people all over the world, particularly the children are deeply perturbed and fear for their future. Most people aremortally afraid that the enormous nuclear stockpile of nearly 36,000 warheads, assembled by the seven nuclear countries,will one day end all life on our planet either in a deliberate war or by accident. The United Nations has proved utterlyincapable of stopping this suicidal arms race. Before the UN came into existence, there was only one country i.e. USAwhich had the Atom Bomb (a toy Bomb in comparison to the Nuclear Bomb). Today, we have seven countries with about36,000 nuclear warheads.1. United States has 12,070 nuclear bombs capable of reaching all over the world2. Russia has 22,500 nuclear bombs with range of 11,000 kms3. France has 500 nuclear bombs with range of 5,300 kms--84--