This article explores one aspect of India’s attempts to address its access to justice dilemma through the establishment of district-level consumer fora. Data points are extracted from 1,400 cases nationwide to piece together a portrait of the input and output of these institutions. The data collected include: win/loss rates; time from filing to decision; presence of attorneys (and their effects on win/loss rates and time from filing to decision); amounts of damages and costs awarded; and types of cases filed. In the end, this sampling of cases, combined with observations and interviews, led to several broad conclusions—that access to justice is increased but not for the marginalized or poor; that the consumer fora are severely underused; and that they are highly localized institutions leaving significant discretion in the hands of forum Presidents to drive the process which greatly varies the effects on access to justice among districts.

This paper argues that the Dalit situation of caste-based oppression in India could be characterized by the enduring co-existence of upward social mobility and atrocities. While being a common-sense understanding, the paper suggests that the relation between upward social mobility and enduring atrocity could be referred to as a “structural mechanism” in the Dalit situation. The concept is used to explain the Dalit problem. Moreover, this structural mechanism sheds more light on developments and discursive breaks in the legal context. A central lesson in the post-colonial period is that the problem of “untouchables” could not simply be conceptualized as a problem of civil law and untouchability. Rather, the problem of atrocities created demands and a need to make caste-based atrocities a concern for criminal law. Ambedkar’s significance as a symbol of Dalit assertion could be viewed in connection with the structural mechanism of Dalit achievements and caste-based exclusion.

Global climate change and consequent potential migration pose a number of challenges and are becoming increasingly important policy issues for Bangladesh. Therefore, policy responses need to deal with diverse issues, including sustainable development (SD), adaptation to climate change, and humanitarian assistance, to address the future challenges posed by climate change and consequent human displacement. There is no simple and straightforward solution to the challenges posed by climate-induced migration, and a “one-size-fits-all” approach will not effectively resolve the complex nature, and patterns, of population displacement. Rather than any single approach, a multifarious, comprehensive, proactive, and coherent policy approach is imperative for managing climate-induced migration in an orderly and humane manner. Based on the available data regarding the environment, climate change, and migration, this paper suggests a range of policy tools and approaches. It also sets out a road map showing how policy interventions could contribute to better integrating the full spectrum of migration issues and concerns into an overall environmental and developmental policy, and vice versa, within Bangladesh.

This article begins with an account of the contexts surrounding China’s “Good Samaritan’s Dilemma”—the fear of civil liabilities as a result of a rescue attempt. It highlights how a notorious hit-and-run case in 2011 has prompted several provinces to consider Good Samaritan law—legislation aimed at encouraging altruism. In light of diverse opinions over the pros and cons of Good Samaritan law, it considers whether law should have a role to play in shaping moral behaviours. On the basis that the law has been on the books for as long as over a century in much of the Western world and parts of East Asia, this article explores how overseas experience may provide insights to China in its adaptation of Good Samaritan law. It concludes that, in China’s case, a non-punitive regime that seeks to protect and compensate Good Samaritans may help encourage the proverbial Chinese bystanders to be altruistic neighbours.

This article identifies and conceptualizes the structural features of the Party-state and proposes a “dual normative system” as a framework to interpret the constitutional reality of China. This framework has four components: (1) structural integration of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP or the Party) and the state; (2) reserved delegation of authority to the state; (3) bifurcation of state decision-making processes; and (4) cohabitation of the two normative systems: one of the Party and one of the state. This article demonstrates that the political reforms in China since the 1980s have not separated the power of the Party and the state, but have created an increasingly institutionalized dual normative system that is more complex compared with the previous fused system, yet more pliable to adjustments and more open to different interpretations, including to that of the “Party-state constitutionalism”, which interprets the “rule of law” as compatible with the rule of the Party.

This article addresses the right to strike in the context of the new Labour Code and amended Trade Union Law of Vietnam.1 It analyses major problems posed today by wildcat strikes in Vietnam’s private sector. It argues that the ongoing approaches of the Vietnamese government and its social partners in strike resolution are ineffective and inconsistent with International Labour Standards. Finally, it suggests a model for the prevention and settlement of such strikes.

This article examines the legal framework regulating unskilled and low-skilled migrant workers in Singapore. It argues that the current legal framework discriminates against these migrant workers and conceptualizes them as undesirable for inclusion in the wider society. This, it is contended, is premised on the assumption that migrant workers could be sequestered from the local population to some extent. This article provides some challenges to this assumption, highlighting instead some of the broader social and political consequences of this exclusionary legal framework. Consequently, it is argued that a more inclusive and integrationist approach is needed, and some positive developments are highlighted.

This article discusses politico-legal relations and actual decision-making in urban government in late colonial Indonesia, notably in the municipality of Bandung. On the basis of verbatim reports of council meetings in the early 1920s,1 the article catches the atmosphere of hot debates touching upon the core problem of colonial rule, namely inequality between racial groups. Decentralization and democratization in the colony had made such discussions unavoidable. The 1923 budgetary debate shows how eloquently elected representatives of the native population used the municipal council as a forum to plea for the interests of Indonesians. The colonial government referred to autonomy of urban desas to justify laissez-faire approaches to natives’ interests. The municipality was in doubt for, at the same time, colonial administration was transitioning from a minimalist to a welfare state model. Hence, notwithstanding their differences, the common ambition to develop Bandung, albeit in a colonial context and led by the mayor, contributed to co-operative attitudes.

Development co-operation in the legal and human rights sector is challenging. It is political, nuanced, and involves multiple, often competing, stakeholders. Adding to this, significant time is spent determining suitable fields for co-operation, designing comprehensive programmes, and establishing robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks. Donors often strive for “ownership” of programmes with tangible results that justify ongoing co-operation. Amid this added complexity, it is easy to forget that good programmes are often simple, well-founded ones that set realistic goals and timeframes. Sense and simplicity can be overlooked. This article draws on lessons learned from personal experiences in two legal and human rights co-operation programmes in Indonesia to discuss six points at the heart of this concept of sense and simplicity. The points are not exhaustive, and are not always easy to implement in the face of political realities. They are a starting point, and stress the need to get back to basics when planning, implementing, and monitoring such programmes.