Judges, Preventive Detention, and Anti-Terror Laws

Shylashri Shankar

in Scaling Justice

Published in print February 2009 | ISBN: 9780195693201
Published online October 2012 | e-ISBN: 9780199081998 | DOI:
Judges, Preventive Detention, and Anti-Terror Laws

Show Summary Details


This chapter investigates the conditions under which the four elements of the embedded negotiator approach impact the likelihood of a judgment favourable to the State. These elements include laws, political preferences, institutional norms and memories, and public concerns. Court's behavior on cases under PDA, TADA and POTA is analysed. The data presented partially affirm the hypothesis that the apex court would support the state against separatist threats but would not confuse political goals with adherence to a religious faith. The higher likelihood of pro-state rulings does not link with an anti-minority attitude of Supreme Court judges. An Indian Supreme Court judge has a complex and nuanced relationship with the law, institutional memories, politics, and public concerns. It is shown that the more cases a judge hears, the more likely he is to change his mind.

Keywords: judges; Indian Supreme Court; law; institutional memories; politics; public concerns; security threats

Chapter.  9143 words.  Illustrated.

Subjects: Human Rights and Immigration

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.