GLOBAL SOUTH & EAST FACE DISPROPORTIONATE INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE, SAYS CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA IN RUSSIA

ST. PETERSBURG — Speaking at the 14th International Legal Forum, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) addressed a global gathering of legal experts, calling out a stark disparity in how international law and compliance standards are applied to wealthier nations versus developing states.

Delivering his address on the theme "Equal Justice, Equal Law: Access as the Measure of International Law’s Humanity," the CJI emphasized that for international legal structures to retain credibility, they must move away from double standards and recognize the unique structural realities of the Global South and Global East.

Selective Accountability and the Legacy of Colonialism
The CJI noted that developing nations are frequently subjected to intense international pressure and stringent oversight that wealthier, more influential Western nations often manage to evade. This scrutiny, he argued, unfairly discounts the monumental socio-economic challenges these regions continue to face, including institution-building, poverty alleviation, and the lingering generational impacts of colonialism.

"The sheer scale of these challenges was never anticipated by the original drafters of international covenants," the CJI observed. He stated that while wealthier nations are rarely forced to reckon with their own imperfect legal records under the international spotlight, developing jurisdictions are routinely held to rigid benchmarks without regard for their domestic contexts.

The CJI warned that when international law functions selectively, it ceases to be a tool for universal equity. "Without true equality before the law," he cautioned, "what we call law is merely the organized will of the stronger party." He stressed that "equal justice" and "equal law" must transition from empty, ceremonial rhetoric into lived realities for all sovereign states.

The Indian Access-to-Justice Model
Shifting the focus to national frameworks, the CJI argued that global equality must begin with local access. He shared India's judicial journey as a practical blueprint for dismantling systemic legal barriers, noting that the country’s judiciary has systematically worked to bridge geographic, economic, and social divides.

Key mechanisms highlighted by the CJI included:

• Relaxed Standing Rules: Lowering procedural barriers so that marginalized groups can bring grievances before the courts.
• Public Interest Litigation (PIL): A unique system where courts accept simple letters or postcards as formal petitions to address systemic injustices.
• Robust Free Legal Aid: Building networks to ensure financial limitations do not preclude citizens from seeking justice.

"Judicial procedure must always be a servant of justice, never its master," the CJI affirmed, advocating for a flexible approach to formal legal rules when human rights and equity are at stake.

Historic and Global Foundations of Equity
To ground his critique, the CJI noted that the foundational concepts of equality and the rule of law are not exclusively Western inventions, pre-dating documents like the Magna Carta. He traced the roots of universal accountability back to ancient Indian jurisprudence, specifically citing Kautilya’s Arthashastra, which held that even a sovereign ruler is bound by law.

He further contextualized this by drawing parallels to historical legal evolution globally, pointing to the Roman lex regia, Islamic Sharia traditions that constrained absolute sovereign power, and the African philosophy of Ubuntu, which links individual justice to community well-being.

The address concluded with a call for the international legal community to foster a more empathetic, inclusive, and multi-polar international order—one that measures the success of international law not by the compliance of the weak, but by its capacity to protect the vulnerable.

Discription:The report focuses on the Chief Justice of India's address regarding global legal asymmetry, synthesizing his critique of the disproportionate international pressure applied to the Global South and Global East. Written entirely in original, public-domain prose to ensure zero intellectual property restrictions, the article contrasts these geopolitical double standards against India's accessible judicial model—such as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and relaxed standing rules—while grounding the concept of universal accountability in historic legal traditions like Kautilya's Arthashastra and the African philosophy of Ubuntu.