—Mara Malagodi, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Law [Editors’ Note: This is one of our biweekly ICONnect columns. For more information on our four columnists for 2021, please see here.] On 23 February 2021, the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of Nepal handed down its long-awaited judgment in the controversial case
International Assistance to Constitution Making between Principle and Expediency
—Mara Malagodi, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Law [Editors’ Note: This is one of our biweekly ICONnect columns. For more information on our four columnists for 2021, please see here.] In the aftermath of the Cold War many countries underwent political transitions coupled with extensive constitutional changes. Constitution making has also increasingly
Joint Symposium on “Towering Judges”: A Foundational, not Towering, Judge
[Editor’s Note: This is part of the joint I-CONnect/IACL-AIDC Blog symposium on “towering judges,” which emerged from a conference held earlier this year at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, organized by Professors Rehan Abeyratne (CUHK) and Iddo Porat (CLB). The author in this post formed part of a panel on “Towering Judges in New/Mixed Constitutions.” The introduction to
Nepal: Agree to (have the Supreme Court) Disagree
—Vikram Aditya Narayan, Advocate, Supreme Court of India Until a couple of decades ago, federalism was nothing more than an academic subject in Nepal. However, it has now become a political reality, with the Parliament/Constituent Assembly deliberating over the manner in which Nepal can and should transform itself under the new Constitution. The basis for a
